IllustrationWHEN THE CONSUMER APPLIED THE BRAKES, THE VEHICLE EXPERIENCED EXTENDED STOPPING DISTANCE. *JB
2000 Chevrolet Cavalier
Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations
More warning signs than most Cavalier years
Owner complaints for the 2000 Chevrolet Cavalier are substantially higher than the model-year median of 140.
About this comparison →How this year compares
Owner complaints by model year
Compare all Cavalier years →Counts vary with age, sales and reporting. They are not failure rates.
What owners reported most
All reported categories
Tap a category to read its complaints. One report may name several components.
When problems were reported
Mileage at the reported incident
220–25K
2125–50K
3050–75K
2375–100K
16100–150K
8150K+
120 reports with mileage · 195 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.
- Electrical System. Review the 69 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Engine And Engine Cooling. Review the 54 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Service Brakes, Hydraulic. Review the 41 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
25 crash reports8 fire reports13 injury reports
Service Brakes, Hydraulic complaints
41 reportsWE BOUGHT A USED CHEVROLET CAVALIER FROM THE YEAR 2000 WITH AN EXTENDED WARRANTY (GM CERTIFIED) FOR 3 MONTHS OR 3,000 MILES. SINCE THE BEGINNING THERE WERE 4 PROBLEMS NOT YET FIXED. 1 - THERE IS A POPPING NOISE UNDER THE BACK OF THE CAR. DEALER (KOONS CHEVROLET - WITHE MARSCH, MD) SAID HE COULDN'T DUPLICATE. AFTER BRINGING THE…
Read full complaint
WE BOUGHT A USED CHEVROLET CAVALIER FROM THE YEAR 2000 WITH AN EXTENDED WARRANTY (GM CERTIFIED) FOR 3 MONTHS OR 3,000 MILES. SINCE THE BEGINNING THERE WERE 4 PROBLEMS NOT YET FIXED. 1 - THERE IS A POPPING NOISE UNDER THE BACK OF THE CAR. DEALER (KOONS CHEVROLET - WITHE MARSCH, MD) SAID HE COULDN'T DUPLICATE. AFTER BRINGING THE CAR FOR THE 3RD TIME, HE SAID THE BRAKES WERE DIRTY AND HE CLEANED THEM, BUT THIS NOISE IS STILL HERE, WHEN STARTING AT A RED TRAFFIC LIGHT FOR EXAMPLE, OR WHEN RIDING ON A ROUGH ROAD. 2 - THERE IS A GRINDING NOISE IN FRONT WHEN DRIVING. IT'S STOPPING WHEN PUSHING THE BRAKE PEDAL. IT'S LINKED WITH THE BRAKES FOR SURE. THE PADS ARE NEW AND THE DEALER SAID THE ROTOR MAKES HIS NOISE, BUT HE REFUSED TO CHANGE IT (WHEREAS IT'S UNDER WARRANTY). HE SAID IT'S NOT UNSAFE. BUT THIS NOISE IS COMING LOUDER AND I FEEL LIKE A LOSS OF CONTROL. 3 - THE ABS LIGHT COME ON EVERY SINGLE DAY WHILE DRIVING AND NOT BRAKING. THE 1ST TIME, THE DEALER CHANGED THE BULB. THE 2ND TIME PROBLEM WAS NOT SOLVE) HE CHANGED THE ALTERNATOR, BECAUSE MY CAR BROKE DOWN THE DAY BEFORE (NO MORE POWER AT ALL). HE SAID THE ALTERNATOR PUTTED A LOW VOLTAGE TO THE ABS CAUSING THE LIGHT TO TURN ON. THE PROBLEM IS NOT SOLVE. AND I NEED TO GO BACK TO THE DEALER. ALL OF THESE PROBLEMS HAVE NOT BEEN SOLVED, AND THIS IS THE 5TH TIME I AM GOING TO THE DEALER. I THINK HE'S PLAYING WITH ME, SO THAT MY CAR WON'T BE UNDER WARRANTY ANY MORE, AND I WOULD PAY TO CHANGE STUFFS IN THE FUTURE. PLEASE PROVIDE INFORMATION AND SUPPORT. THANK YOU. *NLM
I HAVE A 2000 CHEVROLET CAVALIER. THE FIRST PROBLEM I EXPERIENCED WAS IN OCT 2001,WHILE DRIVING THE TEMPERATURE GAUGE WENT TO THE MAXIMUM READING WITHOUT WARNING, I PULLED OFF THE HIGHWAY AND TURNED OFF VEHICLE. WAITED A WHILE STARTED BACK WENT APPROXIMATELY 1/4 MI AND SAME PROBLEM,AFTER STOPPING 3-4 TIMES I STARTED BACK ON TH…
Read full complaint
I HAVE A 2000 CHEVROLET CAVALIER. THE FIRST PROBLEM I EXPERIENCED WAS IN OCT 2001,WHILE DRIVING THE TEMPERATURE GAUGE WENT TO THE MAXIMUM READING WITHOUT WARNING, I PULLED OFF THE HIGHWAY AND TURNED OFF VEHICLE. WAITED A WHILE STARTED BACK WENT APPROXIMATELY 1/4 MI AND SAME PROBLEM,AFTER STOPPING 3-4 TIMES I STARTED BACK ON THE HIGHWAY AND CONTINUED TO DRIVE WITH TEMP GAUGE IN THE RED FOR A APPROX 1 MILE AND ALL GAUGES RETURNED TO NORMAL. CHEVROLET GARAGE COULD NOT FIND ANY PROBLEMS WITH COOLING SYSTEM..MY SECOND PROBLEM I KEEP HEARING A CLANGING/RATTLING SOUND FROM THE FRONT AREA OF VEHICLE WHILE SITTING STILL IF YOU TURN STEERING WHEEL YOU CAN HEAR A THUMP FROM THE FRONT LEFT AREA WHERE STRUT IS LOCATED..MY THIRD PROBLEM IS MY CHECK ENGINE/SERVICE ENGINE LIGHT KEEPS COMING ON AT VARIOUS TIMES. MY FOURTH PROBLEM I HAVE HAD TO REPLACE MY FRONT ROTORS THREE TIMES NOW DUE TO THEM WARPING,THE FIRST TIME I HAD LESS THEN 10,000 MILES....... *NLM
ABS WARNING LIGHT CAME ON AN STAYED ON. THIS WAS CAUSED BY THE ABS MODULE BEING DEFECTIVE AND NEEDING TO BE REPLACED.*AK
WHILE TRAVELING ON THE HIGHWAY THE WEATHER WAS SUNNY SHE HYDROPLANED AND HIT THE DIVIDER STRIP THE DEALERSHIP IS AWARE OF THE PROBLEM. MR
I HAD HAD PROBLEMS WITH MY CAR NOT STOPPING WHEN I WOULD BRAKE IN THE PAST. I TOOK MY CAR INTO THE DEALERSHIP AND THEY SAID IT WAS BECAUSE I NEEDED TO REPLACE MY BRAKEPADS & ROTORS. I PAID TO HAVE THEM REPLACE AND LESS THEN 2000 MILES LATER MY MOM HAD AN ACCIDENT. IT WAS A CLEAR, DRY, MODERATELY TRAVELED ROAD. A WOMAN CUT OF KIP…
Read full complaint
I HAD HAD PROBLEMS WITH MY CAR NOT STOPPING WHEN I WOULD BRAKE IN THE PAST. I TOOK MY CAR INTO THE DEALERSHIP AND THEY SAID IT WAS BECAUSE I NEEDED TO REPLACE MY BRAKEPADS & ROTORS. I PAID TO HAVE THEM REPLACE AND LESS THEN 2000 MILES LATER MY MOM HAD AN ACCIDENT. IT WAS A CLEAR, DRY, MODERATELY TRAVELED ROAD. A WOMAN CUT OF KIP THE MAN IN FRONT OF MY MOM. HE BRAKED, MY MOM SAW WHAT HAPPENED AND HAD PLENTY OF TIME TO BRAKE ,AND WAS ONLY DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 20-25 MILES PER HOUR. SHE STEPPED ON THE BRAKE BUT THE CAR DIDNT SLOW, SO SHE STEPPED HARDER CAUSING THE PEDAL TO GO TO THE FLOOR OF THE CAR. WHEN THAT HAPPENED THE ABS SYSTEM MADE ITS NORMAL NOISE TO INDICATE IT WAS ENGAGED BUT THE CAR STILL DIDNT STOP. KIPS TRUCK AND TOW BALL STOPPED MY CAR. THE AIR BAGS DIDNT DEPLOY AND THERE WAS NO DAMAGE TO KIPS TRUCK. MY MOM IS A VERY EXPERIENCED DRIVER. SHE HAS DRIVEN PROFESSIONALLY FOR A REPUTABLE COURIER SERVICE, AND FOR THE SAN ANTONIO VIA (BUS) SYSTEM. I KNOW THERE WAS NOTHING MORE SHE COULD HAVE DONE TO PREVENT THE ACCIDENT. I TOOK IT TO CHUCK OLSEN THE DEALERSHIP WHO SOLD ME THE CAR, TO CHECK THE ABS SYSTEM. THEY KEPT MY CAR FROM FRIDAY THE 21TH OF JUNE 2002 TO FRIDAY THE 28TH OF JUNE 2002. THEY DIDNT DO ANY EXTENSIVE TESTING, VERY BASIC VISUAL CHECKS, WHICH IS WHAT THEY WROTE ON THE EVALUATION. I DIDNT AGREE WITH THE INITIAL INSPECTION, SO I ASKED TIMIKI J AT GM WHO HANDLED MY PRODUCT FAILURE ALLEGATION, IF I COULD GET A SECOND OPINION. SHE SAID IT WAS FINE BUT THEY WOULDNT PAY FOR IT. SO I PAID ABOUT $125 TO GET A SECOND OPINION. IT TOOK THE NEXT DEALERSHIP ABOUT AN HOUR AND A HALF TO DO A COMPLETE INSPECTION; THEY DETERMINED THAT THERE WAS PRESENTLY NOTHING WRONG WITH THE BREAKING SYSTEM. IN THE INSPECTION NOTES THEY DID NOTE THAT THAT DOESNT MEAN SOMETHING DIDNT HAPPEN. JUST THAT THE ABS COMPUTER HADNT RECORDED A FAILURE. I CALLED TIMIKI 3 TIMES AFTER THE SECOND INSPECTION AND LEFT THREE MESSAGES ASKING HER TO CALL ME BACK. TO THIS DAY, I STILL HAVEN
WHEN SLOWING DOWN AND MAKING A RIGHT TURN. THE BRAKES LOCK UP, CAUSING THE CAR TO GO INTO A SKID. IT'S ECSPECIALLY WORSE ON WET ROADS. NOW IT'S STARTING TO LOCK UP GOING STRAIGHT AND GO INTO A SKID COMING TO COMPLETE STOPS. THE CAR IS VERY UNSAFE. I'VE DECIDED AFTER ALMOST HAVING A NEAR CAR WRECK, TO TAKE IT IN NEXT WEEK. THE LA…
Read full complaint
WHEN SLOWING DOWN AND MAKING A RIGHT TURN. THE BRAKES LOCK UP, CAUSING THE CAR TO GO INTO A SKID. IT'S ECSPECIALLY WORSE ON WET ROADS. NOW IT'S STARTING TO LOCK UP GOING STRAIGHT AND GO INTO A SKID COMING TO COMPLETE STOPS. THE CAR IS VERY UNSAFE. I'VE DECIDED AFTER ALMOST HAVING A NEAR CAR WRECK, TO TAKE IT IN NEXT WEEK. THE LAST KNOWN REPORT WAS ON JULY 8, 2002, WHEN I WAS DRIVING I HAD TO SLOW DOWN THE CAR LOCKED UP AGAIN AND IT STARTED BOUNCING UP AND DOWN. I CAME TO A COMPLETE STOP BEFORE THE CAR RE-ENDED ANOTHER CAR. PLEASE HELP ME WITH ANYMORE INFORMATION ABOUT THIS AND OTHER BRAKING PROBLEMS.*AK
VEHICLE WAS MAKING A LOUD NOISE WHILE DRIVING. CONTACTED DEALER, PROBLEM DUE TO MASTER CYLINDER GOINT OUT.*AK
3/01 STARTED HAVING A PULSATING WHEN BRAKES WERE APPLIED.WENT TO THE DEALER WERE THE CAR WAS PURCHASED .THEY SAID THE ROTORS WERE WARPED IN FRONT.THEY TURNED THE ROTORS .THE PULSATING WAS GONE.1/02 STARTED HAVING THE SAME PROBLEM AGAIN ALONG WITH WHEN I WENT TO STOP I STARTED SLIDING .THAT HAPPENED SEVERAL TIMES THE NEXT TWO DAY…
Read full complaint
3/01 STARTED HAVING A PULSATING WHEN BRAKES WERE APPLIED.WENT TO THE DEALER WERE THE CAR WAS PURCHASED .THEY SAID THE ROTORS WERE WARPED IN FRONT.THEY TURNED THE ROTORS .THE PULSATING WAS GONE.1/02 STARTED HAVING THE SAME PROBLEM AGAIN ALONG WITH WHEN I WENT TO STOP I STARTED SLIDING .THAT HAPPENED SEVERAL TIMES THE NEXT TWO DAYS BEFORE I COULD GET IT TO A CHEVY DEALER.WHEN THEY CHECKED IT THEY SAID I NEEDED MY ROTORS TURNED DOWN AGAIN.SO THEY DID THAT AGAIN.DID NOT HAVE A PROBLEM UNTILL NOW,5/02.I AM HAVING THE SAME PROBLEM AGAIN AFTER ONLY 6000 MILES SINCE THE LAST TIME.I SPOKE WITH THE CHEVY DEALER AGAIN AND THEY SAID IT WOULD PROBABLY NEED NEW ROTORS AND BRAKES.I AM TAKING IT IN MONDAY TO HAVE THIS DONE! THE LAST TIME I HAD TO PAY $60.00 .THEY SAID THE WARRANTY DOES NOT COVER THIS.I HAD 30,000 MILES ON THE CAR THEN. I HAVE NEVER HAD THIS KIND OF PROBLEM WITH BRAKES SINCE I STARTED DRIVING ,34 YEARS AGO!*AK
CONSUMER STATES THAT THE ENGINE IS OVERHEATING AND THE ENGINE LIGHT ILLUMINATED. *TT
Official recalls
204V036000 · Electrical System:ignition:switch
Jan 27, 2004
ON CERTAIN PASSENGER VEHICLES. IF THE ENGINE FAILS TO START AND THE DRIVER HOLDS THE KEY IN THE "START" POSITION FOR AN EXTENDED PERIOD, HIGH CURRENT FLOWS THROUGH THE IGNITION SWITCH, AND SOMETIMES PRODUCES ENOUGH HEAT TO MELT INTERNAL SWITCH PARTS.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: IF THE SWITCH IS DAMAGED, A FIRE COULD OCCUR IN THE STEERING COLUMN, EVEN WITH THE ENGINE OFF AND THE KEY REMOVED. THE FIRE COULD SPREAD TO THE INTERIOR OF THE CAR, WHICH COULD INJURE OCCUPANTS OR CAUSE DAMAGE TO ADJOINING STRUCTURES.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL INSTALL A RELAY KIT IN THESE VEHICLES TO PREVENT HIGH CURRENT FROM FLOWING THROUGH THE IGNITION SWITCH, AND CHECK THAT YOUR CAR WILL START WITH A PROPERLY CHARGED BATTERY AND, IF NECESSARY, REPLACE THE IGNITION SWITCH. OWNER NOTIFICATION WILL BEGIN ON MARCH 1, 2004. 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 1-800-630-2438, PONTIAC AT 1-800-620-7668, BUICK AT 1-866-608-8080, OR OLDSMOBILE AT 1-800-630-6537. CUSTOMERS CAN ALSO CHECK THEIR VEHICLE ONLINE BY GOING TO WWW.MYGMLINK.COM AND ENTERING THE VEHICLE'S IDENTIFICATION NUMBER.
00V201000 · Interior Lighting
Jul 20, 2000
VEHICLE DESCRIPTION: PASSENGER VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH THE BI-FUEL OPTION FAIL TO COMPLY WITH FMVSS NO. 101, "CONTROL LOCATION, IDENTIFICATION, AND ILLUMINATION." THE INSTRUMENT PANEL LIGHTS IN THESE VEHICLES ARE AT FULL ILLUMINATION LEVELS AND CANNOT BE ADJUSTED. THE STANDARD REQUIRES AT LEAST TWO LEVELS OF ILLUMINATION.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: THIS COULD MAKE IT MORE DIFFICULT TO SEE OBJECTS OUTSIDE THE VEHICLE WHEN DRIVING AT NIGHT.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL REPLACE THE FUEL TYPE INDICATOR SWITCH ASSEMBLY, WHICH INCLUDES THE INSTRUMENT PANEL ILLUMINATION CONTROL.
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
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