NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Exterior Lighting complaints
13 reportsClear category filter20,800 miles · Mar 15, 2023
Exterior Lighting
The contact owns a 2000 Chevrolet Cavalier. The contact stated that while driving at an unknown speed, the interior passenger side directional signal began blinking rapidly while activated. Additionally, the contact stated that an onlooker observed that the exterior driver side indicator light was not illuminated when indicator …
Read full complaint
The contact owns a 2000 Chevrolet Cavalier. The contact stated that while driving at an unknown speed, the interior passenger side directional signal began blinking rapidly while activated. Additionally, the contact stated that an onlooker observed that the exterior driver side indicator light was not illuminated when indicator was activated. The vehicle was driven to the dealer where it was diagnosed that the interior lighter fuse needed to be replaced. The vehicle was repaired but the failure persisted. The contact stated that when the weather was cooler, the exterior indicator light was experiencing the failure; however, during warmer weather, the indicator lights operated properly. The manufacturer was notified of the failure. The failure mileage was approximately 20,800.
NHTSA ODI #11511963
170,000 miles · Mar 21, 2016
Exterior Lighting
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2000 CHEVROLET CAVALIER. WHILE STOPPED AT A RED LIGHT, THE CONTACT WAS INFORMED THAT THE REAR BRAKE LAMPS FAILED TO ILLUMINATE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT DIAGNOSED NOR REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 170,000.
NHTSA ODI #10850852
52,000 miles · Nov 9, 2012
Electrical SystemExterior LightingVehicle Speed Control
FIRST DRIVER SIDE REAR TURN SIGNAL BLINKED RAPIDLY, THEN BRAKE LIGHT AND TURN LIGHT CEASED TO WORK. WHEN CHECKED, THE LIGHT AND LENS WERE FUSED (MELTED) TOGETHER. AS WELL DRIVER SIDE WINDOW CEASED TO WORK. MECHANIC STATED ITS ELECTRICAL AND ADVISED I CHECK RECALLS.ALSO SOMETIMES GAS PEDAL ACCELERATES WITHOUT PRESSURE FROM ME. NO…
Read full complaint
FIRST DRIVER SIDE REAR TURN SIGNAL BLINKED RAPIDLY, THEN BRAKE LIGHT AND TURN LIGHT CEASED TO WORK. WHEN CHECKED, THE LIGHT AND LENS WERE FUSED (MELTED) TOGETHER. AS WELL DRIVER SIDE WINDOW CEASED TO WORK. MECHANIC STATED ITS ELECTRICAL AND ADVISED I CHECK RECALLS.ALSO SOMETIMES GAS PEDAL ACCELERATES WITHOUT PRESSURE FROM ME. NO CRUISE CONTROL ENGAGED, NOT ABLE TO DETERMINE WHEN OR WHY...JUST OCCASIONALLY HAPPENS. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10483900
50,000 miles · Mar 16, 2011
Electrical SystemEngine And Engine CoolingExterior Lighting
PURCHASED USED 2000 CAVALIER IN 2006. FIRST PROBLEM (WHICH HAS CONTINUED FOR 5 YEARS) IS THAT THE SERVICE LIGHT WILL COME ON WHEN THE CAR IS CRANKED UNLESS THE HEADLIGHTS ARE FIRST TURNED ON. IF YOU TURN THE HEADLIGHTS OFF WHILE DRIVING, THE SERVICE LIGHT COMES ON. IT WILL NOT GO OFF UNLESS YOU TURN THE CAR OFF AND RESTART …
Read full complaint
PURCHASED USED 2000 CAVALIER IN 2006. FIRST PROBLEM (WHICH HAS CONTINUED FOR 5 YEARS) IS THAT THE SERVICE LIGHT WILL COME ON WHEN THE CAR IS CRANKED UNLESS THE HEADLIGHTS ARE FIRST TURNED ON. IF YOU TURN THE HEADLIGHTS OFF WHILE DRIVING, THE SERVICE LIGHT COMES ON. IT WILL NOT GO OFF UNLESS YOU TURN THE CAR OFF AND RESTART IT (WITH HEADLIGHTS ON). SECOND PROBLEM IS THAT FUEL HAND DOES NOT REFLECT ACCURATE AMOUNT OF GASOLINE IN TANK. IT GOES UP AND DOWN WHILE DRIVING (WITH THE CHECK GAUGES LIGHT ON). OR SOMETIMES IT IS STUCK ON E OR STUCK ON F REGARDLESS OF HOW MUCH FUEL IS ACTUALLY PRESENT. THIRD PROBLEM IS THAT CAR INTERMITTENTLY OVERHEATS AND IS ALWAYS LOSING COOLANT. I HAVE REPLACED THERMOSTAT, WATER PUMP, & RADIATOR. THREE DIFFERENT MECHANICS CANNOT FIND A LEAK IN THE COOLING SYSTEM (DESPITE PRESSURE TESTING, COMPRESSION TESTING, & BLOCK TESTING). WE ARE BAFFLED WHY IT CANNOT RETAIN CONSTANT COOLANT LEVELS. THIS IS A VERY FRUSTRATING SITUATION AS I AM LEFT WITHOUT RELIABLE TRANSPORTATION. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10390337
40,000 miles · Jan 11, 2006
Exterior Lighting
DAYTIME RUNNING LIGHTS ON MY DAUGHTER'S 2000 CHEVY CAVALIER HAVE FAILED. AS A RESULT SHE HAS NO LOW BEAM HEADLIGHTS. PER LOCAL DEALER THE LIGHTS ARE "WIRED INTO THE COMPUTER AND DAY TIME RUNNING LIGHTS CANNOT BE BYPASSED SO THAT THE LOW BEAM HEADLIGHTS WORK." PER THE DEALER THE SOLUTION IS THE REPLACEMENT OF A COMPUTER MODULE …
Read full complaint
DAYTIME RUNNING LIGHTS ON MY DAUGHTER'S 2000 CHEVY CAVALIER HAVE FAILED. AS A RESULT SHE HAS NO LOW BEAM HEADLIGHTS. PER LOCAL DEALER THE LIGHTS ARE "WIRED INTO THE COMPUTER AND DAY TIME RUNNING LIGHTS CANNOT BE BYPASSED SO THAT THE LOW BEAM HEADLIGHTS WORK." PER THE DEALER THE SOLUTION IS THE REPLACEMENT OF A COMPUTER MODULE AT A COST OF $500.00. AS HEADLIGHTS ARE A SAFETY REQUIREMENT I FEEL THAT WHATEVER STEPS ARE NECESSARY TO MAKE THE LOW BEAM HEADLIGHTS OPERABLE IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF GENERAL MOTORS, ESPECIALLY SINCE THE DAY TIME RUNNING LIGHTS ARE NOT A MANDATORY ITEM IN THE USA. *JB
NHTSA ODI #10147488
Mileage unknown · Aug 22, 2005
Exterior LightingCrashFireInjury
2 CAR VEHICLE COLLISION-SEE POLICE REPORT. ON THE ABOVE DATE AND TIME, THE BETHEL FIRE DEPARTMENT WAS DISPATCHED TO THE INTERSECTION OF RESERVOIR ST AND GRASSY PLAIN STREET FOR A MOTOR VEHICLE ACCIDENT. UPON ARRIVAL A TWO CAR MVA WAS DISCOVERED WITH A SMALL VEHICLE FIRE EXTINGUISHED BY THE BETHEL PD. BETHEL CAR ONE, PETE HOLM…
Read full complaint
2 CAR VEHICLE COLLISION-SEE POLICE REPORT. ON THE ABOVE DATE AND TIME, THE BETHEL FIRE DEPARTMENT WAS DISPATCHED TO THE INTERSECTION OF RESERVOIR ST AND GRASSY PLAIN STREET FOR A MOTOR VEHICLE ACCIDENT. UPON ARRIVAL A TWO CAR MVA WAS DISCOVERED WITH A SMALL VEHICLE FIRE EXTINGUISHED BY THE BETHEL PD. BETHEL CAR ONE, PETE HOLMBERG, REQUESTED THIS FIRE MARSHAL DUE TO THE FIRE DAMAGE TO THE VEHICLE. UPON MY EXAMINATION OF THE VEHICLE, I OBSERVED THE FRONT END OF THE INVOLVED VEHICLE WITH MODERATE FRONT-END DAMAGE. THE RIGHT FRONT HEADLAMP ASSEMBLY AREA DID SUSTAIN SOME MELTING AND BURNING TO THE REAR OF THE UNIT. THE LEFT FRONT HEADLAMP ASSEMBLY WAS FOUND ON THE GROUND AWAY FROM THE VEHICLE. THE BULBS FOR EACH UNIT WERE CONNECTED TO THE WIRING/SOCKET AREA. THE IMPACT OF THE COLLISION CAUSED THE PLASTIC HOUSING AROUND THE BULB TO BREAK AND DISLODGE THE BULB FROM THE HEADLAMP ASSEMBLY. THE BULBS WERE PART OF THE DAYTIME RUNNING LIGHT SYSTEM; THEREFORE THEY WERE ON AT THE TIME OF THE ACCIDENT. THE HEAT FROM THE BULB IGNITED THE PLASTIC WIRING HARNESS ON THE LEFT SIDE OF THE VEHICLE (SEE PHOTO #7). THE HEAT FROM THE BULB ON THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE VEHICLE IGNITED THE PLASTIC WIRE HARNESS AS WELL AS THE PLASTIC HEADLAMP ASSEMBLY (SEE PHOTO #5). THE FIRE CAUSED MINIMAL DAMAGE TO THE VEHICLE AND THE FIRE WAS EXTINGUISHED WITH A DRY CHEMICAL FIRE EXTINGUISHER. THE CAUSE OF THIS FIRE HAS BEEN RULED ACCIDENTAL CAUSED BY A BREAK IN THE PLASTIC RETENTION CLIP FOR THE HEADLAMP ASSEMBLY LOOSENING THE BULB FROM ITS PROPER PLACEMENT AND THEN TOUCHING COMBUSTIBLE MATERIALS AND IGNITING.
NHTSA ODI #10133707
2,917 miles · Jan 12, 2005
Electrical SystemEngine And Engine CoolingExterior Lighting
THE VEHICLE ONLY HAD 2917 MILES ON IT WHEN THE STEERING RACK HAD TO BE REPLACED. *NM AT 6237 MILES THE DEALER HAD TO REPLACE A STRUT MOUNT AND A BEARING PLATE. THE ENGINE LIGHT ILLUMINATED AND THE O2 SENSOR AND STARTER WAS REPLACED. THE INTERMEDIATE SHAFT WAS REPLACED TWICE AND THE HEADLAMP WAS REPLACED. *JB
NHTSA ODI #10109484
95,074 miles · Jul 23, 2004
Exterior Lighting
PROBLEMS WITH VEHICLE STARTING UP AS WELL AS GETTING THE HEADLIGHTS TO WORK.*MR THE CONSUMER HAD THE RECALL WORK PERFORMED WHICH WAS RELATED TO THE IGNITION. THE CONSUMER BELIEVES THAT THE IGNITION FAILURE MAY HAVE ALSO CAUSED THE FAILURE OF THE HEADLIGHTS. THE RECALL STATED THAT THE HIGH CURRENT COULD PRODUCE ENOUGH HEAT TO …
Read full complaint
PROBLEMS WITH VEHICLE STARTING UP AS WELL AS GETTING THE HEADLIGHTS TO WORK.*MR THE CONSUMER HAD THE RECALL WORK PERFORMED WHICH WAS RELATED TO THE IGNITION. THE CONSUMER BELIEVES THAT THE IGNITION FAILURE MAY HAVE ALSO CAUSED THE FAILURE OF THE HEADLIGHTS. THE RECALL STATED THAT THE HIGH CURRENT COULD PRODUCE ENOUGH HEAT TO MELT INTERNAL SWITCH PARTS. THE CONSUMER ALSO EXPERIENCED SMOKING AND A BURNING SMELL AT THE STEERING COLUMN. THE CONSUMER WAS TOLD BY THE TECHNICIAN THAT THE HEADLIGHT SWITCH SHORTED OUT AND THAT REPAIR WOULD COST $270. THE CONSUMER FEELS THIS SHOULD BE REPLACED ALONG WITH THE IGNITION RECALL. *NM
NHTSA ODI #10083726
60,000 miles · Jun 8, 2004
Exterior Lighting
WHEN TURNING RIGHT OR LEFT STEERING COLUMN PRODUCED A POPPING SOUND. AS A RESULT, TURN SIGNALS FAILED, AND HEADLIGHTS BLINKED ON AND OFF. *AK
NHTSA ODI #10075844
59,700 miles · Oct 23, 2003
Electrical SystemExterior Lighting
HIGH BEAMS & DRL'S STOPPED WORKING, CHECKED FUSES, NONE BLOWN. TOOK TO DEALER AND FOUND THAT BATTERY THAT HAD BEEN PREVIOUSLY REPLACED FOR LEAKING, WAS AGAIN LEAKING. THE ACID DAMAGED HEADLIGHT WIRE HARNESS MAKING DRL'S AND HIGH BEAMS NON-FUNCTIONAL. DEALER SAYS BATTERY HAS NO WARRANTY EVEN THOUGH BATTERY STATES 5 YEAR WARRANTY.…
Read full complaint
HIGH BEAMS & DRL'S STOPPED WORKING, CHECKED FUSES, NONE BLOWN. TOOK TO DEALER AND FOUND THAT BATTERY THAT HAD BEEN PREVIOUSLY REPLACED FOR LEAKING, WAS AGAIN LEAKING. THE ACID DAMAGED HEADLIGHT WIRE HARNESS MAKING DRL'S AND HIGH BEAMS NON-FUNCTIONAL. DEALER SAYS BATTERY HAS NO WARRANTY EVEN THOUGH BATTERY STATES 5 YEAR WARRANTY. *LA
NHTSA ODI #10043451
NHTSA investigations
3EA02028 · Erratic Fuel Gauge
Opened Sep 30, 2002 · Closed Dec 30, 2003
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Fuel System, Gasoline; Fuel System, Other:storage:fuel Gauge System
ODI OPENED EA 02-028 TO REVIEW COMPLAINTS OF CONSUMERS REPORTING THAT THEIR FUEL GAUGE WAS INCORRECTLY DISPLAYING THE AMOUNT OF FUEL IN THE GAS TANK.THE FUEL GAUGE RECEIVES AN ELECTRICAL SIGNAL FROM A FUEL TANK SENDING SENSOR CIRCUIT CARD.A FLOAT ARM IN THE TANK MOVES ELECTRICAL CONTACTS THAT RUB AGAINST THE CARD AS THE LEVEL OF FUEL RISES AND FALLS.DISRUPTION OF THE ELECTRICAL SIGNAL (SUCH AS CAUSED BY CORROSION OF THE CIRCUIT CARD) WILL CAUSE INCORRECT READINGS TO REGISTER ON THE FUEL GAUGE.GM REPORTED IN THEIR RESPONSE TO ODI DATED JANUARY 13, 2003 THAT THE PRIMARY CAUSE OF ERRATIC FUEL GAUGE OPERATION IS EXCESS ELEMENTAL SULFUR IN FUEL.GM REPORTED THAT ABNORMAL LEVELS OF SULFUR SPORADICALLY OCCURRED IN CERTAIN PARTS OF CANADA AND THE U.S. RESULTING IN REPORTS OF FUEL GAUGE MALFUNCTION.GM MODIFIED THE SENDING SENSOR FOR VEHICLES BUILT AFTER OCTOBER 2000.IT MADE A SECOND SENSOR MODIFICATION FOR VEHICLES BUILT AFTER JANUARY 2003.GM ALSO ISSUED A CUSTOMER SATISFACTION CAMPAIGN (GM NUMBER 00101) IN DECEMBER 2000 FOR U.S. CUSTOMERS IN THE STATE OF MAINE AND ISSUED SEVERAL SERVICE BULLETINS INFORMING DEALERS OF THE AVAILABILITY OF SENSORS WITH IMPROVED CORROSION RESISTANCE.THE COMPLAINT TREND INDICATES THAT COMPLAINTS PEAKED IN LATE 2000 TO EARLY 2001.WARRANTY CLAIMS DECLINED SINCE PEAKING IN APRIL 2002.BASED ON THE NUMBER OF COMPLAINTS AND THE INDICATION OF A DECLINING TREND, FURTHER USE OF AGENCY RESOURCES DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE WARRANTED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT NO SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT EXISTS.THE AGENCY RESERVES THE RIGHT TO TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES.
Additional source detail variants (2)
Fuel System, Gasoline
ODI OPENED EA 02-028 TO REVIEW COMPLAINTS OF CONSUMERS REPORTING THAT THEIR FUEL GAUGE WAS INCORRECTLY DISPLAYING THE AMOUNT OF FUEL IN THE GAS TANK.THE FUEL GAUGE RECEIVES AN ELECTRICAL SIGNAL FROM A FUEL TANK SENDING SENSOR CIRCUIT CARD.A FLOAT ARM IN THE TANK MOVES ELECTRICAL CONTACTS THAT RUB AGAINST THE CARD AS THE LEVEL OF FUEL RISES AND FALLS.DISRUPTION OF THE ELECTRICAL SIGNAL (SUCH AS CAUSED BY CORROSION OF THE CIRCUIT CARD) WILL CAUSE INCORRECT READINGS TO REGISTER ON THE FUEL GAUGE.GM REPORTED IN THEIR RESPONSE TO ODI DATED JANUARY 13, 2003 THAT THE PRIMARY CAUSE OF ERRATIC FUEL GAUGE OPERATION IS EXCESS ELEMENTAL SULFUR IN FUEL.GM REPORTED THAT ABNORMAL LEVELS OF SULFUR SPORADICALLY OCCURRED IN CERTAIN PARTS OF CANADA AND THE U.S. RESULTING IN REPORTS OF FUEL GAUGE MALFUNCTION.GM MODIFIED THE SENDING SENSOR FOR VEHICLES BUILT AFTER OCTOBER 2000.IT MADE A SECOND SENSOR MODIFICATION FOR VEHICLES BUILT AFTER JANUARY 2003.GM ALSO ISSUED A CUSTOMER SATISFACTION CAMPAIGN (GM NUMBER 00101) IN DECEMBER 2000 FOR U.S. CUSTOMERS IN THE STATE OF MAINE AND ISSUED SEVERAL SERVICE BULLETINS INFORMING DEALERS OF THE AVAILABILITY OF SENSORS WITH IMPROVED CORROSION RESISTANCE.THE COMPLAINT TREND INDICATES THAT COMPLAINTS PEAKED IN LATE 2000 TO EARLY 2001.WARRANTY CLAIMS DECLINED SINCE PEAKING IN APRIL 2002.BASED ON THE NUMBER OF COMPLAINTS AND THE INDICATION OF A DECLINING TREND, FURTHER USE OF AGENCY RESOURCES DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE WARRANTED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT NO SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT EXISTS.THE AGENCY RESERVES THE RIGHT TO TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES.
Fuel System, Other:storage:fuel Gauge System
ODI OPENED EA 02-028 TO REVIEW COMPLAINTS OF CONSUMERS REPORTING THAT THEIR FUEL GAUGE WAS INCORRECTLY DISPLAYING THE AMOUNT OF FUEL IN THE GAS TANK.THE FUEL GAUGE RECEIVES AN ELECTRICAL SIGNAL FROM A FUEL TANK SENDING SENSOR CIRCUIT CARD.A FLOAT ARM IN THE TANK MOVES ELECTRICAL CONTACTS THAT RUB AGAINST THE CARD AS THE LEVEL OF FUEL RISES AND FALLS.DISRUPTION OF THE ELECTRICAL SIGNAL (SUCH AS CAUSED BY CORROSION OF THE CIRCUIT CARD) WILL CAUSE INCORRECT READINGS TO REGISTER ON THE FUEL GAUGE.GM REPORTED IN THEIR RESPONSE TO ODI DATED JANUARY 13, 2003 THAT THE PRIMARY CAUSE OF ERRATIC FUEL GAUGE OPERATION IS EXCESS ELEMENTAL SULFUR IN FUEL.GM REPORTED THAT ABNORMAL LEVELS OF SULFUR SPORADICALLY OCCURRED IN CERTAIN PARTS OF CANADA AND THE U.S. RESULTING IN REPORTS OF FUEL GAUGE MALFUNCTION.GM MODIFIED THE SENDING SENSOR FOR VEHICLES BUILT AFTER OCTOBER 2000.IT MADE A SECOND SENSOR MODIFICATION FOR VEHICLES BUILT AFTER JANUARY 2003.GM ALSO ISSUED A CUSTOMER SATISFACTION CAMPAIGN (GM NUMBER 00101) IN DECEMBER 2000 FOR U.S. CUSTOMERS IN THE STATE OF MAINE AND ISSUED SEVERAL SERVICE BULLETINS INFORMING DEALERS OF THE AVAILABILITY OF SENSORS WITH IMPROVED CORROSION RESISTANCE.THE COMPLAINT TREND INDICATES THAT COMPLAINTS PEAKED IN LATE 2000 TO EARLY 2001.WARRANTY CLAIMS DECLINED SINCE PEAKING IN APRIL 2002.BASED ON THE NUMBER OF COMPLAINTS AND THE INDICATION OF A DECLINING TREND, FURTHER USE OF AGENCY RESOURCES DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE WARRANTED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT NO SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT EXISTS.THE AGENCY RESERVES THE RIGHT TO TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES.
PE02066 · Engine Stall Due To Fuel Starvation
Opened Sep 6, 2002 · Closed Nov 3, 2003
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Fuel System, Gasoline; Fuel System, Gasoline:delivery:fuel Pump; Fuel System, Other; Fuel System, Other:delivery:fuel Pump
ODI OPENED PE02-066 TO EVALUATE THE SCOPE AND CONSEQUENCE OF ENGINE POWER-LOSS DUE TO FUEL STARVATION INDUCED BY IN-TANK MODULAR FUEL PUMP STRAINER RESTRICTION.THE SUBJECT PUMPS USE AN EXTERNAL ?SOCK? STRAINER TO FILTER FUEL FLOWING TO THE PUMP INLET.THIS FILTER CAN SOMETIMES BECOME CLOGGED, RESULTING IN A REDUCED FLOW OF FUEL TO THE ENGINE.GM HAS SUBSEQUENTLY MODIFIED THE STRAINERS TO REDUCE THIS RESTRICTION.ANALYSIS OF THE ODI COMPLAINT DATABASE SHOWS THAT DESPITE THESE RESTRICTIONS, THE SUBJECT VEHICLES STALL AT A RATE THAT IS COMPARABLE TO THOSE OF MANY PEER VEHICLES.ADDITIONALLY, NONE OF THE RELEVANT WARRANTY REPAIR RATES EXCEED 1% AT 36 MONTHS OF EXPOSURE.ONE RELATED CRASH INVOLVES A STALLED VEHICLE THAT WAS REAR-ENDED ON THE ROADWAY, WHILE THE REMAINDER INVOLVED MINOR COLLISIONS OR SCRAPES.THE SOLE INJURY CONSISTED OF BRUISING FROM A LOW SPEED FRONTAL CRASH. GIVEN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, FURTHER EXPENDITURE OF AGENCY RESOURCES IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN THIS MATTER.THE PRELIMINARY EVALUATION IS THEREFORE 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 IN THE FUTURE IF WARRANTED.
Additional source detail variants (4)
Fuel System, Gasoline:delivery:fuel Pump
ODI OPENED PE02-066 TO EVALUATE THE SCOPE AND CONSEQUENCE OF ENGINE POWER-LOSS DUE TO FUEL STARVATION INDUCED BY IN-TANK MODULAR FUEL PUMP STRAINER RESTRICTION.THE SUBJECT PUMPS USE AN EXTERNAL ?SOCK? STRAINER TO FILTER FUEL FLOWING TO THE PUMP INLET.THIS FILTER CAN SOMETIMES BECOME CLOGGED, RESULTING IN A REDUCED FLOW OF FUEL TO THE ENGINE.GM HAS SUBSEQUENTLY MODIFIED THE STRAINERS TO REDUCE THIS RESTRICTION.ANALYSIS OF THE ODI COMPLAINT DATABASE SHOWS THAT DESPITE THESE RESTRICTIONS, THE SUBJECT VEHICLES STALL AT A RATE THAT IS COMPARABLE TO THOSE OF MANY PEER VEHICLES.ADDITIONALLY, NONE OF THE RELEVANT WARRANTY REPAIR RATES EXCEED 1% AT 36 MONTHS OF EXPOSURE.ONE RELATED CRASH INVOLVES A STALLED VEHICLE THAT WAS REAR-ENDED ON THE ROADWAY, WHILE THE REMAINDER INVOLVED MINOR COLLISIONS OR SCRAPES.THE SOLE INJURY CONSISTED OF BRUISING FROM A LOW SPEED FRONTAL CRASH. GIVEN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, FURTHER EXPENDITURE OF AGENCY RESOURCES IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN THIS MATTER.THE PRELIMINARY EVALUATION IS THEREFORE 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 IN THE FUTURE IF WARRANTED.
Fuel System, Gasoline
ODI OPENED PE02-066 TO EVALUATE THE SCOPE AND CONSEQUENCE OF ENGINE POWER-LOSS DUE TO FUEL STARVATION INDUCED BY IN-TANK MODULAR FUEL PUMP STRAINER RESTRICTION.THE SUBJECT PUMPS USE AN EXTERNAL ?SOCK? STRAINER TO FILTER FUEL FLOWING TO THE PUMP INLET.THIS FILTER CAN SOMETIMES BECOME CLOGGED, RESULTING IN A REDUCED FLOW OF FUEL TO THE ENGINE.GM HAS SUBSEQUENTLY MODIFIED THE STRAINERS TO REDUCE THIS RESTRICTION.ANALYSIS OF THE ODI COMPLAINT DATABASE SHOWS THAT DESPITE THESE RESTRICTIONS, THE SUBJECT VEHICLES STALL AT A RATE THAT IS COMPARABLE TO THOSE OF MANY PEER VEHICLES.ADDITIONALLY, NONE OF THE RELEVANT WARRANTY REPAIR RATES EXCEED 1% AT 36 MONTHS OF EXPOSURE.ONE RELATED CRASH INVOLVES A STALLED VEHICLE THAT WAS REAR-ENDED ON THE ROADWAY, WHILE THE REMAINDER INVOLVED MINOR COLLISIONS OR SCRAPES.THE SOLE INJURY CONSISTED OF BRUISING FROM A LOW SPEED FRONTAL CRASH. GIVEN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, FURTHER EXPENDITURE OF AGENCY RESOURCES IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN THIS MATTER.THE PRELIMINARY EVALUATION IS THEREFORE 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 IN THE FUTURE IF WARRANTED.
Fuel System, Other:delivery:fuel Pump
ODI OPENED PE02-066 TO EVALUATE THE SCOPE AND CONSEQUENCE OF ENGINE POWER-LOSS DUE TO FUEL STARVATION INDUCED BY IN-TANK MODULAR FUEL PUMP STRAINER RESTRICTION.THE SUBJECT PUMPS USE AN EXTERNAL ?SOCK? STRAINER TO FILTER FUEL FLOWING TO THE PUMP INLET.THIS FILTER CAN SOMETIMES BECOME CLOGGED, RESULTING IN A REDUCED FLOW OF FUEL TO THE ENGINE.GM HAS SUBSEQUENTLY MODIFIED THE STRAINERS TO REDUCE THIS RESTRICTION.ANALYSIS OF THE ODI COMPLAINT DATABASE SHOWS THAT DESPITE THESE RESTRICTIONS, THE SUBJECT VEHICLES STALL AT A RATE THAT IS COMPARABLE TO THOSE OF MANY PEER VEHICLES.ADDITIONALLY, NONE OF THE RELEVANT WARRANTY REPAIR RATES EXCEED 1% AT 36 MONTHS OF EXPOSURE.ONE RELATED CRASH INVOLVES A STALLED VEHICLE THAT WAS REAR-ENDED ON THE ROADWAY, WHILE THE REMAINDER INVOLVED MINOR COLLISIONS OR SCRAPES.THE SOLE INJURY CONSISTED OF BRUISING FROM A LOW SPEED FRONTAL CRASH. GIVEN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, FURTHER EXPENDITURE OF AGENCY RESOURCES IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN THIS MATTER.THE PRELIMINARY EVALUATION IS THEREFORE 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 IN THE FUTURE IF WARRANTED.
Fuel System, Other
ODI OPENED PE02-066 TO EVALUATE THE SCOPE AND CONSEQUENCE OF ENGINE POWER-LOSS DUE TO FUEL STARVATION INDUCED BY IN-TANK MODULAR FUEL PUMP STRAINER RESTRICTION.THE SUBJECT PUMPS USE AN EXTERNAL ?SOCK? STRAINER TO FILTER FUEL FLOWING TO THE PUMP INLET.THIS FILTER CAN SOMETIMES BECOME CLOGGED, RESULTING IN A REDUCED FLOW OF FUEL TO THE ENGINE.GM HAS SUBSEQUENTLY MODIFIED THE STRAINERS TO REDUCE THIS RESTRICTION.ANALYSIS OF THE ODI COMPLAINT DATABASE SHOWS THAT DESPITE THESE RESTRICTIONS, THE SUBJECT VEHICLES STALL AT A RATE THAT IS COMPARABLE TO THOSE OF MANY PEER VEHICLES.ADDITIONALLY, NONE OF THE RELEVANT WARRANTY REPAIR RATES EXCEED 1% AT 36 MONTHS OF EXPOSURE.ONE RELATED CRASH INVOLVES A STALLED VEHICLE THAT WAS REAR-ENDED ON THE ROADWAY, WHILE THE REMAINDER INVOLVED MINOR COLLISIONS OR SCRAPES.THE SOLE INJURY CONSISTED OF BRUISING FROM A LOW SPEED FRONTAL CRASH. GIVEN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, FURTHER EXPENDITURE OF AGENCY RESOURCES IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN THIS MATTER.THE PRELIMINARY EVALUATION IS THEREFORE 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 IN THE FUTURE IF WARRANTED.
SQ01002 · Erratic Fuel Gauge
Opened Jan 26, 2001 · Closed Sep 30, 2002
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Vehicle Speed Control:linkages
There is no summary currently available
Illustration