← New search

2003 Chevrolet Avalanche

Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations

More warning signs than most Avalanche years

Owner complaints for the 2003 Chevrolet Avalanche are substantially higher than the model-year median of 82.

About this comparison →

When problems were reported

Mileage at the reported incident

161 reports with mileage · 43 unknown

NHTSA’s mileage field refers to the reported incident, not necessarily the filing date. This shows report counts, not the likelihood of a failure.

What to inspect

Issues worth paying extra attention to based on owner reports.

  • Service Brakes. Review the 51 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Electrical System. Review the 42 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Service Brakes, Hydraulic. Review the 27 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →

NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.

10 crash reports2 fire reports5 injury reports

Service Brakes, Hydraulic complaints

27 reports
Clear category filter
43,000 miles · Sep 8, 2005
Service Brakes, HydraulicCrash

DRIVING TO WORK. DRY CONDITIONS. HAD 4-5 CAR LENGTHS BETWEEN ME AND CAR IN FRONT OF ME. CAR IN FRONT OF ME STOPPED. I WAS GOING ABOUT 30-35 MPH. TRUCK WOULD NOT STOP. ABS DID NOT COME ON AND WHEELS DID NOT LOCKUP. I REAR ENDED THE TRUCK IN FRONT OF ME. IT FELT LIKE THERE WAS NO BRAKING POWER AT ALL. BRAKE PEDAL WAS TO T…

Read full complaint

DRIVING TO WORK. DRY CONDITIONS. HAD 4-5 CAR LENGTHS BETWEEN ME AND CAR IN FRONT OF ME. CAR IN FRONT OF ME STOPPED. I WAS GOING ABOUT 30-35 MPH. TRUCK WOULD NOT STOP. ABS DID NOT COME ON AND WHEELS DID NOT LOCKUP. I REAR ENDED THE TRUCK IN FRONT OF ME. IT FELT LIKE THERE WAS NO BRAKING POWER AT ALL. BRAKE PEDAL WAS TO THE FLOOR. TRUCK JUST SLOWLY SLOWED DOWN. THERE IS DEFINITELY A PROBLEM WITH THE BRAKING SYSTEM. *NM

NHTSA ODI #10135868

Mileage unknown · Aug 17, 2005
Service Brakes, Hydraulic

ON 3/23/04 WE PURCHASED A 2003 CHEVROLET AVALANCHE, VIN: [XXX], WITH 13067 MILES ON IT FROM JERRY HAGGERTY CHEVROLET, GLEN ELLYN, IL. OVER THE WEEKEND OF AUGUST 6 & 7, 2005, MY HUSBAND AND I WERE DRIVING THE TRUCK WHICH BEGAN MAKING A NOISE WHEN THE BRAKES WERE USED. ON 8/12/05 I DROVE THE VEHICLE AGAIN AT WHICH TIME AN EVEN …

Read full complaint

ON 3/23/04 WE PURCHASED A 2003 CHEVROLET AVALANCHE, VIN: [XXX], WITH 13067 MILES ON IT FROM JERRY HAGGERTY CHEVROLET, GLEN ELLYN, IL. OVER THE WEEKEND OF AUGUST 6 & 7, 2005, MY HUSBAND AND I WERE DRIVING THE TRUCK WHICH BEGAN MAKING A NOISE WHEN THE BRAKES WERE USED. ON 8/12/05 I DROVE THE VEHICLE AGAIN AT WHICH TIME AN EVEN LOUDER NOISE WAS HEARD WHEN USING THE BRAKES. AN APPOINTMENT WAS MADE FOR THE BRAKES TO BE CHECKED ON 8/17/05 AT BILL JACOB'S CHEVROLET, PLAINFIELD,IL. THE TRUCK HAD 25,000 MILES. THEY DETERMINED THE TRUCK NEEDED NEW REAR BRAKES AND A RIGHT SIDE ROTOR AND QUOTED A PRICE OF $400.00. IT WAS NOT CONSIDERED WARRANTY WORK EVEN THOUGH THEY HAD SEEN BRAKES FAIL WITH AS LITTLE AS 10,000 MILES. WE DISCUSSED THIS WITH A SECOND COMPANY, MIDAS, WHO STATED THIS WAS A SYSTEMIC PROBLEM WITH GM TRUCKS WHERE THE BRAKES RUST AND FAIL PREMATURELY. MIDAS AGGREED TO REPLACE BOTH REAR ROTORS AND BRAKE PADS AT OUR COST OF $340.00. *AK UPDATED 07/19/2012 *JS INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)

NHTSA ODI #10133199

51,285 miles · Aug 2, 2005
Service Brakes, Hydraulic

BRAKES FAILED, ALMOST SLIDE INTO CROSS WAY TRAFFIC. TOOK INTO 2 DIFFERENT REPAIR FACILITIES( FIRESTONE & MERLIN BRAKES) THEY BOTH INFORMED ME THAT ALL 4 ROTORS WERE RUSTED ENTIRELY THROUGH FROM INSIDE OUT, MY TRUCK IS ONLY 2 YEARS OLD. I TRIED TO GET THE MANUFACTURE TO COVER THE COST OF THE ROTORS BUT THEY REFUSED AND INFORMED M…

Read full complaint

BRAKES FAILED, ALMOST SLIDE INTO CROSS WAY TRAFFIC. TOOK INTO 2 DIFFERENT REPAIR FACILITIES( FIRESTONE & MERLIN BRAKES) THEY BOTH INFORMED ME THAT ALL 4 ROTORS WERE RUSTED ENTIRELY THROUGH FROM INSIDE OUT, MY TRUCK IS ONLY 2 YEARS OLD. I TRIED TO GET THE MANUFACTURE TO COVER THE COST OF THE ROTORS BUT THEY REFUSED AND INFORMED ME THAT THE ONLY ITEMS TO RUST ON MY CAR WAS CAUSED BY THE ENVIRONMENT, AND THE 2 PEOPLE I SPOKE TO WERE OF NO HELP, VERY RUDE AND WOULD NOT GIVE ME THE TELEPHONE NUMBER TO THE CORPORATE OFFICE. ( MICHELL BALYKEO AND STEVEN SCHWAUSCH). I HAVE JUST BEEN TURNED DOWN TODAY AND WILL TRY TO HAVE MY TRUCK REPAIRED SHORTLY. *JB

NHTSA ODI #10131140

28,770 miles · Jan 4, 2005
Service Brakes, Hydraulic

PREMATURE WEAR OF EMERGENCY BRAKES ON A 2003 CHEVROLET AVANLANCHE 1500. THE BRAKE IS NOT USED AND THE SERVICE PEOPLE COULD NOT EXPLAIN WHY THE BRAKES WORE OUT. MY REGULAR BRAKES JUST AT 28700 MILES JUST NEEDED TO BE REPLACED IN THE BACK BUT NOT THE FRONT. THE FRONT BRAKES ARE ALMOST LIKE NEW. EVEN THE SERVICE MANAGER SAID THAT …

Read full complaint

PREMATURE WEAR OF EMERGENCY BRAKES ON A 2003 CHEVROLET AVANLANCHE 1500. THE BRAKE IS NOT USED AND THE SERVICE PEOPLE COULD NOT EXPLAIN WHY THE BRAKES WORE OUT. MY REGULAR BRAKES JUST AT 28700 MILES JUST NEEDED TO BE REPLACED IN THE BACK BUT NOT THE FRONT. THE FRONT BRAKES ARE ALMOST LIKE NEW. EVEN THE SERVICE MANAGER SAID THAT IT DID NOT SEEM RIGHT. GM JUST SAYS NOTHING THEY WILL DO. IT COST ME ABOUT $150 DOLLARS(REQUIRED FOR INSPECTION) TO FIX THOSE EMERGENCY BRAKES AND I BELIEVE THERE IS A DEFECT IN THE SYSTEM THAT ALLOWED THE BRAKES TO WEAR OUT. THEY SHOULD NOT HAVE ANY WEAR AS EMERGENCY BRAKES. GM SAID THEY HAD A LOT OF COMPLAINTS BUT THEY COULD NOT EXPLAIN IT EITHER. CAN YOU HELP ME AND INVESTIGATE THIS PROBLEM? BASICALLY I WAS TOLD BY GM THAT THEY ARE AWARE OF THE PROBLEM BUT DON'T KNOW WHAT IS CAUSING IT. SO MAYBE I SHOULDN'T USE THE EMERGENCY BRAKE AT ALL. SINCE THEY CAN'T PROVE WHAT'S WRONG THEY WON'T HELP ME. SOUNDS LIKE AN EXCUSE NOT TO FIX WHAT'S WRONG. MAYBE IT'S JUST A WAY OF CAUSING THE OWNERS OF THESE VEHICLES TO PAY MORE AT SERVICE/INSPECTION TIME. A SCAM!*AK

NHTSA ODI #10105747

6,000 miles · Apr 19, 2004
Electrical SystemService Brakes, HydraulicVisibility

WHILE DRIVING MY 2003 CHEV AVALANCHE DOWN A HILL I REALIZED THAT WHEN I STEPPED ON MY BRAKES, THEY WENT TO THE FLOOR, THE VEHICLE SLOWED DOWN, BUT VERY SLOWLY. I HAVE TOWED MY BOAT WITH THIS VEHICLE IN THE PAST AND I THOUGHT THAT IT WAS HAVING A HARD TIME SLOWING DOWN. I'M AFFRAID THAT IF I HAVE TO STOP QUICKLY THE BRAKES WILL N…

Read full complaint

WHILE DRIVING MY 2003 CHEV AVALANCHE DOWN A HILL I REALIZED THAT WHEN I STEPPED ON MY BRAKES, THEY WENT TO THE FLOOR, THE VEHICLE SLOWED DOWN, BUT VERY SLOWLY. I HAVE TOWED MY BOAT WITH THIS VEHICLE IN THE PAST AND I THOUGHT THAT IT WAS HAVING A HARD TIME SLOWING DOWN. I'M AFFRAID THAT IF I HAVE TO STOP QUICKLY THE BRAKES WILL NOT STOP THE VEHICLE IN TIME. I AM A STATE TROOPER AND I AM VERY FAMILLIAR WITH THE BRAKING SYSTEMS TO INCLUDE ABS. I ONLY HAVE 9000 MILES ON THE VEHICLE AND THIS SHOULDN'T BE HAPPENING. I TOOK THE VEHICLE TO A LOCAL GM DEALERSHIP FOR SEVERAL REPAIRS, I REQUESTED THEM TO CHECK THE BRAKES. I WAS ADVISED BY THE SERVICE MGR THAT THE BRAKES WERE WITHIN GM SPECS. I ASKED HIM WHAT THAT MEANT? HE SAID THAT HE HAD HAD A LADY COME IN SEVERAL WEEKS AGO COMPLAINING OF THE SAME THING AND BECAUSE SHE WOULDN'T GO AWAY HE CONTACTED THE GM ENGINEERS, THEY CAME OUT AND INSPECTED HER BRAKES, THEY TOLD HIM THAT HER BRAKES WERE WITHIN SPECS AND THEY WOULDN'T DO ANYTHING. HE THEN TOLD ME THAT MY BRAKES WERE BETTER THAN HER'S. I ASKED HIM WHAT HE MEANT BY THAT, HE SAID THAT IF HER BRAKES WERE OK THEN MY BRAKES WOULD BE WITHIN SPECS. I TOLD HIM THAT I WASN'T SATISFIED WITH THE WAY THE BRAKES WORKED AND THAT I WANTED HIM TO MAKE A NOTE OF MY DIS-SATISFACTION. HE NEVER WROTE THIS ON MY INVOICE. THE SECOND COMPLAINT IS THAT I HAD ADVISED THE SERVICE DEPARTMENT OF A PROBLEM WITH THE REMOTE CONTROLED OUTSIDE MIRRORS. THEY WERE NOT WORKING THE WAY THEY WERE DESIGNED. I WAS ADVISED THAT IT WAS OPERATOR ERROR. I TOLD THEM THAT I WAS VERY CAPABLE OF READING AND SETTING THE OPERATOR PREFERENCES. I TOLD HIM THAT THIS WAS THE SECOND TIME THAT THE VEHICLE HAD BEEN TO A GM DEALERSHIP FOR THE OUTSIDE MIRRORS NOT WORKING PROPERLY. I HAVE READ ON YOU SERVICE BULLETIN WEB SITE THAT THEIR HAD BEEN ONE ISSUED FOR THIS TYPE OF PROBLEM. I AM ALSO HAVING A PROBLEM WITH THE ALARM SYSTEM, IT DOESN'T SET PROPERLY, THEY AGAIN ADVISED ME THAT IT WAS OPERATOR ERROR. *AK

NHTSA ODI #10066521

40 miles · Apr 12, 2004
Service Brakes, Hydraulic

DURING A PANIC STOP/HARD BRAKE, BRAKING IS INSUFFICIANT. WITH MULTIPLE HARD BRAKES IN A ROW, BRAKING POWER IS REGAINED, THOUGH RETURN TO PREVIOUS STATE OCCURS WHEN VEHICLE IS NOT DRIVEN FOR APPROXIMATELY 6-12+ HOURS.*AK

NHTSA ODI #10066001

Mileage unknown · May 21, 2003
Service Brakes, Hydraulic

WHEN THE CONSUMER APPLIED THE BRAKES THE PEDAL WENT DOWN TO THE FLOOR AND THERE WERE NO BRAKES. THIS FORCED THE DRIVER TO PULL OFF THE ROAD. *NLM RETURNED USPS, 2ND ATTEMPT MADE 10/16/07 FAILED . *LJ

NHTSA ODI #10020321

Official recalls

4

05V163000 · Seat Belts:rear/other

Apr 22, 2005

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 IMPROVE THE FIT CONDITION FOR THIS USER GROUP. IN ADDITION TO INSTRUCTIONS ON PROPER INFANT AND YOUNG CHILD RESTRAINT (WITH CHILD SEATS OR BOOSTERS), SPECIAL VERBIAGE FOR RESTRAINING OLDER CHILD IS INCLUDED IN THE OWNER'S MANUAL. ALSO, THE SUGGESTED SEAT BELT FIT/ROUTING FOR ADULTS, IRRESPECTIVE OF SEATING POSITION, IS DESCRIBED IN THE OWNER'S MANUAL TEXT.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: 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.

Remedy: 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.

04V129000 · Structure:body:tailgate:hinge And Attachments

Mar 17, 2004

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.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: 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.

Remedy: 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.

04V045000 · Service Brakes, Hydraulic

Feb 4, 2004

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.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: 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.

Remedy: 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.

03V019000 · Fuel System, Gasoline:storage:tank Assembly

Jan 27, 2003

ON CERTAIN PICKUP TRUCKS AND SPORT UTILITY VEHICLES, VEHICLES, DURING A 30 DEGREE LEFT ANGLE FRONTAL IMPACT OF SUFFICIENT SEVERITY, A TEAR COULD DEVELOP IN THE MID-FRAME CROSS MEMBER AT ITS ATTACHMENT TO THE LEFT FRAME RAIL. IF THE MID-FRAME CROSS MEMBER TEARS DURING FRONTAL IMPACT AND PRODUCES A SHARP EDGE, CONTACT OF THE SHARP EDGE WITH THE FUEL TANK COULD RESULT IN A PUNCTURE OF THE FUEL TANK AND POSSIBLE FUEL LEAKAGE.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: FUEL LEAKAGE, IN THE PRESENCE OF AN IGNITION SOURCE, COULD RESULT IN A FIRE.

Remedy: DEALERS WILL INSTALL A FUEL TANK SHIELD. OWNER NOTIFICATION BEGAN FEBRUARY 20, 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.

Model-level recall history does not show whether a particular VIN is affected or has received a repair. Check a VIN with NHTSA ↗

NHTSA investigations

4

PE10010 · Brake Line Corrosion Failure

Opened Mar 30, 2010 · Closed Jan 5, 2011

Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Service Brakes, Hydraulic; Service Brakes, Hydraulic:power Assist:hydraulic:hoses, Lines/piping, And Fittings

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.

Additional source detail variants (2)

Service Brakes, Hydraulic

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.

Service Brakes, Hydraulic:power Assist:hydraulic:hoses, Lines/piping, And Fittings

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.

DP05009 · Parking Brake Failure

Opened Dec 20, 2005 · Closed May 31, 2006

Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Parking Brake; Parking Brake:conventional; Parking Brake:conventional:mechanical

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.

Additional source detail variants (3)

Parking Brake:conventional

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.

Parking Brake:conventional:mechanical

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.

Parking Brake

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.

EA04012 · Hydraulic Pump Failres

Opened Apr 30, 2004 · Closed Feb 28, 2005

Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Service Brakes, Hydraulic:power Assist; Steering:hydraulic Power Assist System

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.

Additional source detail variants (2)

Service Brakes, Hydraulic:power Assist

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.

Steering:hydraulic Power Assist System

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.

EA04005 · Tailgate Cable Breakage

Opened Feb 19, 2004 · Closed Sep 28, 2004

Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Latches/locks/linkages:tailgate:latch; Structure:body:tailgate ; Structure:body:tailgate:hinge And Attachments

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.

Additional source detail variants (6)

Latches/locks/linkages:tailgate:latch

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.

Latches/locks/linkages:tailgate:latch

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.

Structure:body:tailgate

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.

Structure:body:tailgate

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.

Structure:body:tailgate:hinge And Attachments

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.

Structure:body:tailgate:hinge And Attachments

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.