IllustrationSCORING OF INNER REAR ROTOR. NOTICED AFTER 1100MI. DUE TO SOME PART OF CALIPER RUBBING ON ROTOR. *TR
2008 Chevrolet Cobalt Ss
Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations
Limited comparison data
There is not enough comparable history to draw a useful model-year comparison.
About this comparison →How this year compares
Owner complaints by model year
Compare all Cobalt Ss 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
600–25K
825–50K
1050–75K
575–100K
1100–150K
1150K+
85 reports with mileage · 10 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, Hydraulic. Review the 64 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Service Brakes. Review the 7 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Electrical System. Review the 6 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
0 crash reports1 fire reports0 injury reports
Service Brakes, Hydraulic complaints
64 reportsSINCE I PURCHASED MY 08 COBALT SS, I NOTICED THE BRAKES MADE NOISES AND THE REAR BRAKES WORE FUNNY. BROUGHT IT TO THE DEALER WHERE THEY DEEMED THIS "NORMAL FOR THESE BRAKE PADS." AT 19,000 MILES I ALREADY NEEDED NEW REAR BRAKES AS THE DEALER SAID THEY WERE "GRINDING AGAINST THE METAL" AND MY ROTORS NEEDED TO BE RESURFACED. SOMET…
Read full complaint
SINCE I PURCHASED MY 08 COBALT SS, I NOTICED THE BRAKES MADE NOISES AND THE REAR BRAKES WORE FUNNY. BROUGHT IT TO THE DEALER WHERE THEY DEEMED THIS "NORMAL FOR THESE BRAKE PADS." AT 19,000 MILES I ALREADY NEEDED NEW REAR BRAKES AS THE DEALER SAID THEY WERE "GRINDING AGAINST THE METAL" AND MY ROTORS NEEDED TO BE RESURFACED. SOMETHING HAS TO BE DONE ABOUT THIS AS PUTTING A NEW PAD ON DOES NOT FIX THE PROBLEM AND I WILL ONLY NEED NEW PADS AND ROTORS IN ANOTHER 15,000 MILES OR SO. *TR
2008 COBALT SS. SCORING ON BOTH SIDES OF FRONT AND REAR ROTORS. NOISE FROM REAR BRAKES. FIRST NOTICED AT 10,000 MILES (CAR NOW HAS 12000). DEALER WOULD NOT FIX UNDER WARRANTY BECAUSE IN THEIR VIEW, SCORED ROTORS ARE"COSMETIC". *TR
THE REAR ROTORS ON MY 2008 CHEVROLET COBALT SS SEEM TO BE WEARING VERY FAST. MY CAR HAS 19,000 MILES ON IT, AND IT IS ABOUT A YEAR AND A HALF OLD. I TOOK DELIVERY ON MAY 31ST 2008. I NOTICED THE ROTORS STARTING TO WEAR THIS PAST SPRING. *TR
REAR ROTORS BEGINNING TO SHOW GROOVES IN THEM WITH ONLY 14K MILES ON CAR. *TR
AT APPROXIMATELY 18,000 MILES, MY 2008 CHEVROLET COBALT SS HAD A GRINDING NOISE COMING FROM THE REAR BRAKES. THIS NOISE WAS WORSE WHEN I USED THE BRAKES. I DROVE THE VEHICLE ANOTHER 30 MILES TO MY DESTINATION. UPON ARRIVAL, I NOTICED THAT I HAD LOST ABOUT 50% OF MY BRAKING POWER AND THAT THE GRINDING NOISE WAS MUCH WORSE THAN W…
Read full complaint
AT APPROXIMATELY 18,000 MILES, MY 2008 CHEVROLET COBALT SS HAD A GRINDING NOISE COMING FROM THE REAR BRAKES. THIS NOISE WAS WORSE WHEN I USED THE BRAKES. I DROVE THE VEHICLE ANOTHER 30 MILES TO MY DESTINATION. UPON ARRIVAL, I NOTICED THAT I HAD LOST ABOUT 50% OF MY BRAKING POWER AND THAT THE GRINDING NOISE WAS MUCH WORSE THAN WHEN I FIRST NOTICED IT, 30 MILES EARLIER. OF COURSE, I REPLACED THE BRAKE PADS, KNOWING THAT THE NOISE THEY WERE MAKING WAS CAUSED BY THE PADS WEARING OUT AND THE METAL GRINDING AGAINST THE ROTOR. TO MY SURPRISE, ONLY THE INSIDE BRAKE PADS WERE WORN TO THE METAL, AND THE OUTER BRAKE PADS HAD JUST OVER 1/4 OF AN INCH OF PAD LEFT. I IMMEDIATELY CALLED MY LOCAL GM DEALER AND I WAS INFORMED THAT THERE IS A TSB (TECHNICAL SERVICE BULLETIN) POSTED IN THEIR COMPUTER SYSTEMS THAT SAYS THE PROBLEM IS CAUSED BY THE DRIVER AND THAT GM DEALERS ARE NOT TO COVER THE REAR BRAKE PROBLEM. I KNOW THAT THIS PROBLEM WILL OCCUR IN ANOTHER 20,000 MILES BECAUSE THERE IS SOMETHING WRONG WITH THE CALIPERS OR ENTIRE BRAKE SYSTEM. THE INSIDE PADS SHOULD NOT WEAR OUT FASTER THAN THE FRONT. THEY SHOULD ALSO WEAR EVENLY. ANOTHER CONCERN I HAVE IS THE LOSS OF BRAKING POWER IN ONLY 30 MILES FROM THE EARLIEST SIGN OF A BRAKE PROBLEM. I DON'T LIKE THE FACT THAT THE REAR BRAKES, SPECIFICALLY THE INSIDE BRAKE PADS, ARE DOING APPROXIMATELY 50% OF THE BRAKING. MOST OF THE BRAKING SHOULD BE DONE BY THE FRONT BRAKES, WHICH HAVE WELL OF 1/4 OF AN INCH OF BRAKE PAD LEFT ON THE INSIDE AND OUTSIDE PADS. *TR
THE REAR BRAKES ARE TOAST ON MY NEW CAR. I HAVE AROUND 10,000 MILES AND WILL SOON HAVE TO PAY FOR NEW ROTORS AND PADS. HOPEFULLY I CAN AFFORD TO DO THIS BEFORE MY CALIPERS GO OUT TOO. 2008 COBALT SS - PREMATURE WARE - NEVER DRIVING HARD - DAILY DRIVER - *TR
REAR BRAKES: INNER PADS METAL ON METAL, OUTER PADS STILL PLENTY OF LIFE LEFT AT 17,500 MILES. REPORTED BRAKE SQUEAL/GRINDING BY 4,000 MILES, HAD PARKING BRAKE RE-ADJUSTED AT THAT TIME. *TR
REAR DRIVER SIDE ROTOR GRINDING BAD ABOUT 1 INCH FROM THE TOP ON THE INSIDE. PASSENGER SIDE ROTOR GROVING ALL OF THE INSIDE. CAR HAS 14,000 MILES ON IT. *TR
REAR BRAKES ON 2008 CHEVY COBALT SS, WEAR RAPIDLY CAUSING DESTRUCTION OF THE ROTORS AND EXCESSIVE STRESS ON THE FRONT BRAKES. REPLACED UNDER WARRANTY THE FIRST TIME AT ~12,000 MILES. REAR PADS COMPLETELY SHOT AGAIN AT ~22,000 MILES. THIS TIME, THE DEALERSHIP WOULDN'T COVER IT. THE EXTENDED ABUSE TO THE REAR BRAKE SYSTEM CAUSE AB…
Read full complaint
REAR BRAKES ON 2008 CHEVY COBALT SS, WEAR RAPIDLY CAUSING DESTRUCTION OF THE ROTORS AND EXCESSIVE STRESS ON THE FRONT BRAKES. REPLACED UNDER WARRANTY THE FIRST TIME AT ~12,000 MILES. REAR PADS COMPLETELY SHOT AGAIN AT ~22,000 MILES. THIS TIME, THE DEALERSHIP WOULDN'T COVER IT. THE EXTENDED ABUSE TO THE REAR BRAKE SYSTEM CAUSE ABNORMAL NOISE FROM THE REAR DURING LOW SPEEDS. *TR
Official recalls
0No recalls in this snapshot.
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
2PE20011 · Fuel Line Leak
Opened Jul 5, 2020 · Closed Aug 17, 2023
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Fuel System, Gasoline; Fuel System, Other:delivery:hoses, Lines/piping, And Fittings; Fuel/propulsion System
On July 5, 2020, the Office of Defects Investigations (ODI) opened PE20-011 to investigate instances of metal fuel lines under the vehicle corroding and leaking fuel in model year (MY) 2008 through 2010 Chevrolet Cobalt and 2008 through 2009 Chevrolet HHR passenger cars manufactured by General Motors (GM). The metal fuel lines are corroding and leaking fuel in the area between the front and rear wheels on the driver's side of the vehicle before the muffler. Most consumers allege a fuel odor and/or an observable fuel leak that alerts them to the condition.The subject metal fuel lines have a protective AGE coating and, in the vicinity of the left rear wheel, are further wrapped in a foil heat shield. The AGE coating consists of an annealed zinc aluminum alloy metal coating with extended corrosion protection paint. Under certain conditions, water and corrosive road deicing agents may enter a crevice between the heat shield and the AGE coating. With extended environmental exposure in high corrosive environments, the AGE coating can degrade. If it degrades enough, the base metal lines may begin to corrode beneath the heat shield.Corrosion to the fuel lines may eventually cause a perforation to develop in the line, allowing fuel vapors to escape from between the line and the heat shield, emitting a fuel odor that will be detectable to the vehicle operator. If the corrosion progresses, fuel may begin to weep from the line. Further metal degradation due to corrosion could create a drip or a mist of fuel. If this occurs, vehicle owners may see drips, spots, or puddles on the ground near the rear portion of the vehicle, primarily along the driver's side rear wheel.The majority of allegations (85%) were reported for vehicles that are operated in the salt belt region of the United States. This area includes states in the Northeast, mid-Atlantic, and Midwest regions. Additionally, the average failure mileage in the subject vehicles is approximately 111,000 across all data sources.Considering the low manufacturer complaint/warranty rates of fuel line replacement, the fact that the majority of failures are concentrated in salt belt states, high failure mileages, as well as the field exposure time for the subject vehicles, and the highly detectable and progressive nature of this failure over time, the potential safety consequences of this issue are very low. To date, there have been no reported crashes, injuries, or fatalities related to this issue. There are two reported fires in ODI data and no reported fires in GM data. Both ODI reported fires were minor, occurred after the vehicle was parked, and were extinguished utilizing fire extinguishers.In view of the progressive failure occurring at high mileages, the age of the subject vehicles, the high detectability of the leak, and the majority of failures occurred in salt belt states, this Preliminary Evaluation is closed. The agency reserves the right to take additional action if warranted by new circumstances.Review the ODI reports cited above at nhtsa.gov under the attached identification numbers.
Additional source detail variants (3)
Fuel/propulsion System
On July 5, 2020, the Office of Defects Investigations (ODI) opened PE20-011 to investigate instances of metal fuel lines under the vehicle corroding and leaking fuel in model year (MY) 2008 through 2010 Chevrolet Cobalt and 2008 through 2009 Chevrolet HHR passenger cars manufactured by General Motors (GM). The metal fuel lines are corroding and leaking fuel in the area between the front and rear wheels on the driver's side of the vehicle before the muffler. Most consumers allege a fuel odor and/or an observable fuel leak that alerts them to the condition.The subject metal fuel lines have a protective AGE coating and, in the vicinity of the left rear wheel, are further wrapped in a foil heat shield. The AGE coating consists of an annealed zinc aluminum alloy metal coating with extended corrosion protection paint. Under certain conditions, water and corrosive road deicing agents may enter a crevice between the heat shield and the AGE coating. With extended environmental exposure in high corrosive environments, the AGE coating can degrade. If it degrades enough, the base metal lines may begin to corrode beneath the heat shield.Corrosion to the fuel lines may eventually cause a perforation to develop in the line, allowing fuel vapors to escape from between the line and the heat shield, emitting a fuel odor that will be detectable to the vehicle operator. If the corrosion progresses, fuel may begin to weep from the line. Further metal degradation due to corrosion could create a drip or a mist of fuel. If this occurs, vehicle owners may see drips, spots, or puddles on the ground near the rear portion of the vehicle, primarily along the driver's side rear wheel.The majority of allegations (85%) were reported for vehicles that are operated in the salt belt region of the United States. This area includes states in the Northeast, mid-Atlantic, and Midwest regions. Additionally, the average failure mileage in the subject vehicles is approximately 111,000 across all data sources.Considering the low manufacturer complaint/warranty rates of fuel line replacement, the fact that the majority of failures are concentrated in salt belt states, high failure mileages, as well as the field exposure time for the subject vehicles, and the highly detectable and progressive nature of this failure over time, the potential safety consequences of this issue are very low. To date, there have been no reported crashes, injuries, or fatalities related to this issue. There are two reported fires in ODI data and no reported fires in GM data. Both ODI reported fires were minor, occurred after the vehicle was parked, and were extinguished utilizing fire extinguishers.In view of the progressive failure occurring at high mileages, the age of the subject vehicles, the high detectability of the leak, and the majority of failures occurred in salt belt states, this Preliminary Evaluation is closed. The agency reserves the right to take additional action if warranted by new circumstances.Review the ODI reports cited above at nhtsa.gov under the attached identification numbers.
Fuel System, Gasoline
On July 5, 2020, the Office of Defects Investigations (ODI) opened PE20-011 to investigate instances of metal fuel lines under the vehicle corroding and leaking fuel in model year (MY) 2008 through 2010 Chevrolet Cobalt and 2008 through 2009 Chevrolet HHR passenger cars manufactured by General Motors (GM). The metal fuel lines are corroding and leaking fuel in the area between the front and rear wheels on the driver's side of the vehicle before the muffler. Most consumers allege a fuel odor and/or an observable fuel leak that alerts them to the condition.The subject metal fuel lines have a protective AGE coating and, in the vicinity of the left rear wheel, are further wrapped in a foil heat shield. The AGE coating consists of an annealed zinc aluminum alloy metal coating with extended corrosion protection paint. Under certain conditions, water and corrosive road deicing agents may enter a crevice between the heat shield and the AGE coating. With extended environmental exposure in high corrosive environments, the AGE coating can degrade. If it degrades enough, the base metal lines may begin to corrode beneath the heat shield.Corrosion to the fuel lines may eventually cause a perforation to develop in the line, allowing fuel vapors to escape from between the line and the heat shield, emitting a fuel odor that will be detectable to the vehicle operator. If the corrosion progresses, fuel may begin to weep from the line. Further metal degradation due to corrosion could create a drip or a mist of fuel. If this occurs, vehicle owners may see drips, spots, or puddles on the ground near the rear portion of the vehicle, primarily along the driver's side rear wheel.The majority of allegations (85%) were reported for vehicles that are operated in the salt belt region of the United States. This area includes states in the Northeast, mid-Atlantic, and Midwest regions. Additionally, the average failure mileage in the subject vehicles is approximately 111,000 across all data sources.Considering the low manufacturer complaint/warranty rates of fuel line replacement, the fact that the majority of failures are concentrated in salt belt states, high failure mileages, as well as the field exposure time for the subject vehicles, and the highly detectable and progressive nature of this failure over time, the potential safety consequences of this issue are very low. To date, there have been no reported crashes, injuries, or fatalities related to this issue. There are two reported fires in ODI data and no reported fires in GM data. Both ODI reported fires were minor, occurred after the vehicle was parked, and were extinguished utilizing fire extinguishers.In view of the progressive failure occurring at high mileages, the age of the subject vehicles, the high detectability of the leak, and the majority of failures occurred in salt belt states, this Preliminary Evaluation is closed. The agency reserves the right to take additional action if warranted by new circumstances.Review the ODI reports cited above at nhtsa.gov under the attached identification numbers.
Fuel System, Other:delivery:hoses, Lines/piping, And Fittings
On July 5, 2020, the Office of Defects Investigations (ODI) opened PE20-011 to investigate instances of metal fuel lines under the vehicle corroding and leaking fuel in model year (MY) 2008 through 2010 Chevrolet Cobalt and 2008 through 2009 Chevrolet HHR passenger cars manufactured by General Motors (GM). The metal fuel lines are corroding and leaking fuel in the area between the front and rear wheels on the driver's side of the vehicle before the muffler. Most consumers allege a fuel odor and/or an observable fuel leak that alerts them to the condition.The subject metal fuel lines have a protective AGE coating and, in the vicinity of the left rear wheel, are further wrapped in a foil heat shield. The AGE coating consists of an annealed zinc aluminum alloy metal coating with extended corrosion protection paint. Under certain conditions, water and corrosive road deicing agents may enter a crevice between the heat shield and the AGE coating. With extended environmental exposure in high corrosive environments, the AGE coating can degrade. If it degrades enough, the base metal lines may begin to corrode beneath the heat shield.Corrosion to the fuel lines may eventually cause a perforation to develop in the line, allowing fuel vapors to escape from between the line and the heat shield, emitting a fuel odor that will be detectable to the vehicle operator. If the corrosion progresses, fuel may begin to weep from the line. Further metal degradation due to corrosion could create a drip or a mist of fuel. If this occurs, vehicle owners may see drips, spots, or puddles on the ground near the rear portion of the vehicle, primarily along the driver's side rear wheel.The majority of allegations (85%) were reported for vehicles that are operated in the salt belt region of the United States. This area includes states in the Northeast, mid-Atlantic, and Midwest regions. Additionally, the average failure mileage in the subject vehicles is approximately 111,000 across all data sources.Considering the low manufacturer complaint/warranty rates of fuel line replacement, the fact that the majority of failures are concentrated in salt belt states, high failure mileages, as well as the field exposure time for the subject vehicles, and the highly detectable and progressive nature of this failure over time, the potential safety consequences of this issue are very low. To date, there have been no reported crashes, injuries, or fatalities related to this issue. There are two reported fires in ODI data and no reported fires in GM data. Both ODI reported fires were minor, occurred after the vehicle was parked, and were extinguished utilizing fire extinguishers.In view of the progressive failure occurring at high mileages, the age of the subject vehicles, the high detectability of the leak, and the majority of failures occurred in salt belt states, this Preliminary Evaluation is closed. The agency reserves the right to take additional action if warranted by new circumstances.Review the ODI reports cited above at nhtsa.gov under the attached identification numbers.
PE10005 · Electric Power Steering Failure
Opened Jan 27, 2010 · Closed Jul 19, 2010
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Steering:electric Power Assist System
In a March 1, 2010 letter, General Motors Corporation (GM) provided a defect information report to NHTSA regarding a problem that could result in sudden loss of power steering assist in certain model year (MY) 2005 through 2010 Chevrolet Cobalt and MY 2007 through 2010 Pontiac G5 vehicles equipped with electric power steering (EPS).The letter indicates that the loss of steering assist could occur at any time while driving and that, once assist is lost, a message is displayed on the Driver Information Center (DIC) and a chime sounds to inform the driver.The letter further states that steering control is maintained in manual mode, but would require greater driver effort at low vehicle speeds.In the next ignition cycle, power assist is typically regained and the DIC message is no longer displayed.GM's letter identifies the root cause of the EPS failure as the EPS motor and indicates that production of a new motor started in December 2009.GM's recall repair procedure instructs dealers to replace the EPS motor in all recalled vehicles. ODI's analysis of all information available related to sudden loss of EPS assist while driving in the MY 2005 through 2009 Chevrolet Cobalt vehicles shows current complaint and warranty rates of 323/100,000 vehicles and 0.4% respectively.In response to ODI's request for information, GM identified 81 complaints where a crash was claimed that may be related to loss of EPS assist.ODI's analysis of all crash claims was based on verifiable factors such as; whether a loss of EPS was indicated at the time of the crash by a chime or malfunction indicator lamp or if a EPS related component malfunction was identified after the crash occurred.With this method ODI identified 36 possible crashes related to EPS failure.GM assessed crash claims based on the available facts and excluded crash claims that indicated that the vehicle was travelling at speeds in the range of 30 mph or greater.GM said that it believes if power assist is lost while a vehicle is moving at speeds in the range of 30 mph or greater there is a small difference in steering efforts perceived in subjective evaluations at those speeds and it is unlikely to lead to loss of vehicle control. Based on GM's safety recall, this investigation is closed.