TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2005 CHEVROLET COLORADO EQUIPPED WITH LAREDO TIRES, SIZE P235/70/R15. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING 70 MPH, THE REAR DRIVER'S TIRE BLEW OUT. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT NOTIFIED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 80,000. THE VIN WAS UNAVAILABLE.
2005 Chevrolet Colorado
Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations
More warning signs than most Colorado years
Owner complaints for the 2005 Chevrolet Colorado are substantially higher than the model-year median of 84.
About this comparison →How this year compares
Owner complaints by model year
Compare all Colorado 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
288 reports with mileage · 68 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 →
- Service Brakes, Hydraulic. Review the 61 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Exterior Lighting. Review the 49 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Tires complaints
14 reportsI HAVE A 2005 CHEVY COLORADO AND I CANNOT GET THE SPARE TIRE TO RELEASE FROM UNDER THE VEHICLE. I HAVE FOLLOWED ALL MANUFACTURER INSTRUCTIONS AND SEVERAL OTHER PEOPLE HAVE TRIED TO REMOVE THE SPARE AS WELL. THIS IS ABSOLUTELY RIDICULOUS AS I LIVE IN A COLD CLIMATE AND COULD BE IN AN EMERGENCY SITUATION AND UNABLE TO CHANGE A FL…
Read full complaint
I HAVE A 2005 CHEVY COLORADO AND I CANNOT GET THE SPARE TIRE TO RELEASE FROM UNDER THE VEHICLE. I HAVE FOLLOWED ALL MANUFACTURER INSTRUCTIONS AND SEVERAL OTHER PEOPLE HAVE TRIED TO REMOVE THE SPARE AS WELL. THIS IS ABSOLUTELY RIDICULOUS AS I LIVE IN A COLD CLIMATE AND COULD BE IN AN EMERGENCY SITUATION AND UNABLE TO CHANGE A FLAT TIRE BECAUSE THE SPARE WILL NOT RELEASE. DEFINITELY POOR ENGINEERING. *TR
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2005 CHEVROLET COLORADO. THE VEHICLE HAS GOODYEAR WRANGLER RT/S TIRES, SIZE P26570R16. WHILE DRIVING 45 MPH, THE FRONT DRIVER SIDE TIRE EXPLODED. THE CONTACT DID NOT NOTICE ANY DIFFERENCES IN THE VEHICLE PRIOR TO THE FAILURE. SHE EXAMINED THE TIRES AND NOTICED THAT THE MANUFACTURED DATE FOR EACH ONE WAS…
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2005 CHEVROLET COLORADO. THE VEHICLE HAS GOODYEAR WRANGLER RT/S TIRES, SIZE P26570R16. WHILE DRIVING 45 MPH, THE FRONT DRIVER SIDE TIRE EXPLODED. THE CONTACT DID NOT NOTICE ANY DIFFERENCES IN THE VEHICLE PRIOR TO THE FAILURE. SHE EXAMINED THE TIRES AND NOTICED THAT THE MANUFACTURED DATE FOR EACH ONE WAS FIVE YEARS PRIOR TO THEIR PURCHASE DATE. THE TIRES WERE INTENDED TO BE NEW. THE TIRES HAVE NOT BEEN DIAGNOSED BY THE DEALER. THE CURRENT AND FAILURE MILEAGES WERE 55,763. UPDATED 07/10/08. *LJ UPDATED
ABNORMAL TIRE WEAR AND SUSPENSION NOISES ON CHEVROLET COLORADO 4 X4 2005 MODEL. WITH LESS THAT 20,000 MILES BOTH FRONT TIRES WERE WORN INTO THE STEEL BELTS. I REPLACE BOTH TIRE AND HAD THE FRONT END ALIGNED BY A LOCAL TIRE STORE. 5000 MILES LATER THE INSIDES WERE WEARING AGAIN. THIS TIME I TOOK THE TRUCK TO THE LOCAL CHEVROLET D…
Read full complaint
ABNORMAL TIRE WEAR AND SUSPENSION NOISES ON CHEVROLET COLORADO 4 X4 2005 MODEL. WITH LESS THAT 20,000 MILES BOTH FRONT TIRES WERE WORN INTO THE STEEL BELTS. I REPLACE BOTH TIRE AND HAD THE FRONT END ALIGNED BY A LOCAL TIRE STORE. 5000 MILES LATER THE INSIDES WERE WEARING AGAIN. THIS TIME I TOOK THE TRUCK TO THE LOCAL CHEVROLET DEALER IN ANDERSON,SC. I HAD SEVERAL ITEMS TO BE ADDRESSED BEFORE MY ORIGINAL WARRANTY EXPIRED. ONE OF THESE ITEMS WAS THE FRONT END ASSEMBY- SQUEAKS AND RATTLES PLUS THE TIRE WEAR. THE LOCAL DEALER KEPT MY TRUCK OVERNIGHT AND REPORTED THAT I PROBABLY NEEDED TO GET THE FRONT-END ALIGNED AND I WOULD HAVE TO PAY FOR THIS SERVICE BECAUSE THE ORIGINAL TIRES WERE NOT ON THE TRUCK. THE ORIGINAL TIRES WERE NOT ON THE TRUCK BECAUSE THEY WERE WORN OUT. I HAD VISITED MY CAR STATS.COM TO READ PROBLEMS ASSOCIATED WITH 2005 COLORADO. ONE COMPLAINT NUMBER 10156778 TOLD OF A GM SERVICE BULLETIN CONCERNING TORSION BAR SETUP ON THE COLORADO. I ASKED THE CHEVROLET DEALER TO CHECK SERVICE BULLETIN 1686447. THEY RESET THE ENTIRE FRONT END. I WILL NOT KNOW WHETHER OR NOT THIS FIXED THE SITUATION UNTIL ENOUGH MILES HAVE BEEN PLACED ON THE TRUCK TO CHECK FOR WEAR. I REALLY APPRECIATE THE " MYCARSTATS.COM "WEBSITE. WITHOUT THIS INFORMATION MY LOCAL DEALER WOULD HAVE DONE NOTHING TO FIX THIS PROBLEM. *TR
DT*: THE CONTACT STATED WHILE DRIVING VARIOUS SPEEDS IN NORMAL DRIVING CONDITIONS, THERE WAS A PRONOUNCED VIBRATION WITHIN THE FRONT SUSPENSION. THE VEHICLE WAS INSPECTED BY AN INDEPENDENT REPAIR SHOP WHO DETERMINED THE VEHICLE NEEDED AN ALIGNMENT. AFTERWARDS, THE PROBLEM PERSISTED. THE VEHICLE WAS INSPECTED BY A DEALER WHO …
Read full complaint
DT*: THE CONTACT STATED WHILE DRIVING VARIOUS SPEEDS IN NORMAL DRIVING CONDITIONS, THERE WAS A PRONOUNCED VIBRATION WITHIN THE FRONT SUSPENSION. THE VEHICLE WAS INSPECTED BY AN INDEPENDENT REPAIR SHOP WHO DETERMINED THE VEHICLE NEEDED AN ALIGNMENT. AFTERWARDS, THE PROBLEM PERSISTED. THE VEHICLE WAS INSPECTED BY A DEALER WHO DETERMINED THE VEHICLE NEEDED ANOTHER FRONT ALIGNMENT. THE CONTACT EXPRESSED CONCERN THAT THERE MAY BE AN ISSUE WITH THE TIRES WEARING PREMATURELY ON THEIR OWN. THE TIRES WERE GENERAL P23575/R15. ADDITIONALLY, THE DEALER DETERMINED THAT POOR ALIGNMENT CAUSED THE PREMATURE WEAR OF THOSE TIRES. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT NOTIFIED. *AK
TOOK VEHICLE TO DEALERSHIP FOR EXCESSIVE WEAR OF INSIDE OF THE FRONT TIRES. SINCE VEHICLE WAS AT 13000 MILES THE FACTORY WARRANTY WAS NO LONGER COVERED FOR ANY REPAIR. DEALERSHIP WAS NOT GOING TO COVER ANYTHING. THEY WERE GOING TO CHARGE A $40 FEE JUST TO EVALUATE THE PROBLEM. SINCE THE FRONT END WAS OUT OF ALIGNMENT THE FEE WAS…
Read full complaint
TOOK VEHICLE TO DEALERSHIP FOR EXCESSIVE WEAR OF INSIDE OF THE FRONT TIRES. SINCE VEHICLE WAS AT 13000 MILES THE FACTORY WARRANTY WAS NO LONGER COVERED FOR ANY REPAIR. DEALERSHIP WAS NOT GOING TO COVER ANYTHING. THEY WERE GOING TO CHARGE A $40 FEE JUST TO EVALUATE THE PROBLEM. SINCE THE FRONT END WAS OUT OF ALIGNMENT THE FEE WAS WAIVED AND WAS CHARGED $59.95 FOR THE ALIGNMENT. TOOK VEHICLE TO A TIRE STORE AND PAID FOR A NEW SET OF TIRES FOR A TOTAL REPAIR OF OVER $200. RESEARCH SHOWS THAT THIS IS A COMMON PROBLEM BUT MANUFACTURER DENIES ANY PROBLEM. COMPLAINT WAS FILED WITH MANUFACTURER SAME DAY. *JB
TOOK CAR TO WAL-MART SERVICE TO HAVE OIL CHANGE AND TIRES ROTATED. WAS ADVISED THAT THE GENERAL TIRES, WHICH WERE O.E. TIRES HAD A BELT SEPARATION (24K MILES) AND THAT THEY WERE UNSAFE AND THEY REFUSED TO ROTATE. *JB
1. IMPROPER FRONT END ALIGNMENT, REPAIRED AT DEALER UNDER WARRANTY. 2. FIVE FLAT TIRES, RESULTING FROM PUNCTURE AND IMPROPER WHEEL/TIRE SEAL-REPAIRED FREE BY LOCAL TIRE DEALERS.*AK
DT*: THE CONTACT STATED FOUR MONTHS AFTER PURCHASE, THE FRONT TIRES WERE WEARING ABNORMALLY. THE DEALERSHIP ALIGNED THE VEHICLE. FOUR MONTHS LATER, THE DEALERSHIP DETERMINED THE WEARING WAS WORSE ON THE INSIDE. THE MANUFACTURER OF THE VEHICLE WAS CONTACTED AND TWO MONTHS LATER THE TWO FRONT TIRES WERE REPLACED. TWO MONTHS L…
Read full complaint
DT*: THE CONTACT STATED FOUR MONTHS AFTER PURCHASE, THE FRONT TIRES WERE WEARING ABNORMALLY. THE DEALERSHIP ALIGNED THE VEHICLE. FOUR MONTHS LATER, THE DEALERSHIP DETERMINED THE WEARING WAS WORSE ON THE INSIDE. THE MANUFACTURER OF THE VEHICLE WAS CONTACTED AND TWO MONTHS LATER THE TWO FRONT TIRES WERE REPLACED. TWO MONTHS LATER, THESE TIRES ARE WEARING ABNORMALLY IN THE MIDDLE. THERE HAS BEEN NO DETERMINATION AS TO WHY THE WEAR IS OCCURRING *GENERAL TIRES). *NM
DT CONTACT STATED THE FRONT TIRES WORE OUT. THIS WAS THE THIRD SET OF TIRES ON THE VEHICLE. HE CONTACTED THE DEALER, THEY STATED IT WAS DUE TO THE POOR QUALITY TIRES. THE TIRES WERE SERVICED ON A REGULAR BASIS. WHEN THE TIRES WORE OUT TO A CERTAIN POINT ONE FELT VIBRATION IN THE STEERING WHEEL. *AK
Official recalls
310V575000 · Child Seat
Nov 18, 2010
GM IS RECALLING CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 2004-2011, CHEVROLET COLORADO, GMC CANYON, MODEL YEAR 2006, ISUZU I-280/I-350, AND MODEL YEAR 2007-2008, I-290/I-370, REGULAR CAB VEHICLES AND EXTENDED CAB VEHICLES WITHOUT A REAR SEAT AND EQUIPPED WITH A FRONT 60/40 SPLIT BENCH SEAT. THESE VEHICLES FAIL TO COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARD NO. 225, "CHILD RESTRAINT ANCHORAGE SYSTEMS." THE TOP TETHER ANCHOR FOR THE FRONT CENTER SEAT IS NOT ACCESSIBLE AND THE OWNER MANUAL DOES NOT INCLUDE INSTRUCTIONS REGARDING HOW TO USE THE TOP TETHER.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: BOTH NHTSA AND GM DISCOURAGE PLACEMENT OF A CHILD IN A FRONT SEAT. NEVERTHELESS, THERE ARE INDIVIDUAL CIRCUMSTANCES THAT MAY REQUIRE PLACEMENT OF A CHILD IN A RESTRAINT IN THE FRONT CENTER SEATING POSITION OF THIS VEHICLE THAT DOES NOT OFFER A REAR SEAT. LACK OF ACCESS TO THE TOP TETHER ANCHOR AND A LACK OF INSTRUCTIONS AS TO HOW TO USE IT, MAY RESULT IN IMPROPER INSTALLATION OF A CHILD RESTRAINT. IMPROPER INSTALLATION OF A CHILD RESTRAINT CAN RESULT IN A REDUCTION IN THE RESTRAINT'S PERFORMANCE IN THE EVENT OF A CRASH AND AN INCREASED RISK OF INJURY OR DEATH TO THE CHILD SEATED IN THE RESTRAINT.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL CUT A HOLE INTO THE BACK PANEL TRIM COVER TO ALLOW ACCESS TO THE TOP TETHER ANCHOR FOR THE FRONT CENTER SEAT POSITION AND WILL PROVIDE SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION AS TO USE IN THE OWNER'S MANUAL. THE MANUFACTURER HAS NOT YET PROVIDED AN OWNER NOTIFICATION SCHEDULE FOR THIS CAMPAIGN. OWNERS MAY CONTACT CHEVROLET AT 1-800-630-2438, GMC AT 1-866-996-9463, ISUZU AT 1-800-255-6727 OR VISIT GM'S WEBSITE AT WWW.GMOWNERCENTER.COM.
09V310000 · Exterior Lighting:brake Lights:switch
Jul 29, 2009
GM IS RECALLING 185,903 MODEL YEAR 2004-2009 COLORADO, GMC MODEL YEAR 2009-2004 CANYON, MODEL YEAR 2006 I-280, I-350, MODEL YEAR 2007-2008 I-290, AND I-370, PASSENGER VEHICLES ORIGINALLY SOLD IN OR CURRENTLY REGISTERED IN THE STATES OF ALABAMA, ARIZONA, FLORIDA, GEORGIA, HAWAII, LOUISIANA, MISSISSIPPI, NEVADA, NEW MEXICO, PUERTO RICO, SOUTH CAROLINA, TEXAS, U.S. VIRGIN ISLANDS AND UTAH. SOME OF THESE VEHICLES HAVE A BRAKE LAMP SWITCH THAT MAY NOT WORK AS DESIGNED DUE TO CONTAMINATION IN THE SWITCH.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: THIS CONDITION COULD CAUSE THE SIMULTANEOUS LOSS OF ALL BRAKE LAMPS OR CAUSE ALL OF THE BRAKE LAMPS TO STAY ON CONTINUOUSLY. BOTH OF THESE CONDITIONS COULD FAIL TO WARN OTHERS OF THE DRIVER'S INTENTIONS AND COULD LEAD TO A VEHICLE CRASH.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL INSPECT AND REPLACE THE NECESSARY COMPONENTS AS SPECIFIED IN THE RECALL BULLETIN FREE OF CHARGE. GM ANTICIPATES THAT PARTS WILL BE AVAILABLE BY JUNE 2010. A SPECIAL COVERAGE FOR VEHICLES REGISTERED IN ALL OTHER STATES WILL BE IMPLEMENTED IN THE SAME TIME FRAME. IN THE INTERIM, OWNERS WHO EXPERIENCE THE FAILURE CAN OBTAIN A FREE REPAIR, HOWEVER THEY WILL BE REQUIRED TO RETURN WHEN THE NEW DESIGN PART BECOMES AVAILABLE. OWNERS MAY CONTACT CHEVROLET AT 1-800-630-2438, GMC AT 1-866-996-9463, ISUZU AT 1-800-255-6727 OR AT WWW.GMOWNERCENTER.COM.
06V139000 · Exterior Lighting:brake Lights:switch
Apr 27, 2006
CERTAIN PICKUP TRUCKS MAY EXPERIENCE THE PERMANENT LOSS OF BRAKE LAMP FUNCTION OR BRAKE LAMPS THAT ARE ILLUMINATED AT ALL TIMES. THE CENTER HIGH-MOUNTED STOP LAMP (CHMSL) IS AFFECTED IN BOTH INSTANCES. ALSO, IF EQUIPPED, THE CRUISE CONTROL WILL BECOME INOPERATIVE. ANY TRAILER BRAKE LAMPS WHICH ARE CONNECTED TO THE VEHICLE'S BRAKE LAMP WIRING WILL MIMIC THE VEHICLE'S BRAKE LAMPS WHEN EITHER CONDITION OCCURS.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: A FOLLOWING DRIVER MAY NOT KNOW WHEN THE BRAKES HAVE BEEN APPLIED, AND A REAR-END CRASH COULD OCCUR WITHOUT PRIOR WARNING.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL REPLACE THE BRAKE LAMP SWITCH ASSEMBLY. THE RECALL BEGAN ON DECEMBER 5, 2006. OWNERS MAY CONTACT CHEVROLET AT 1-800-630-2438; GMC AT 1-866-996-9463 OR ISUZU AT 1-800-255-6727.
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
2RQ09001 · Brake Lamp Switch Malfunction
Opened Feb 25, 2009 · Closed Jul 30, 2009
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Exterior Lighting; Exterior Lighting:brake Lights:switch
ON JULY 28,2009, GM INITIATED A REGIONAL RECALL CAMPAIGN ON CERTAIN MODEL YEAR (MY) 2004-2009 CHEVROLET COLORADO AND GMC CANYON VEHICLES AND MY2006-2008 ISUZU I-SERIES VEHICLES.THE STATES AND U.S. TERRITORIES INVOLVED ARE AL, AZ, FL, GA, HI, LA, MS, NV, NM, PR, SC, TX, VI AND UT.A TOTAL OF 185,903 VEHICLES WILL BE RECALLED WITH 92,272 VEHICLES WITHIN THE SCOPE OF THIS INVESTIGATION.IN ADDITION, A SPECIAL COVERAGE/EXTENDED WARRANTY PROGRAM WILL BE INITIATED FORVEHICLES REGISTERED IN ALL OTHER STATES. GM DETERMINED THAT BRAKE LAMP SWITCH FAILURES ARE MORE LIKELY TO OCCUR IN VEHICLES IN WHICH CUSTOMERS USED INTERIOR CLEANERS CONTAINING SILICON AND THAT RESIDE IN HOT GEOGRAPHICAL LOCATIONS.BRAKE LAMP SWITCH CONTAMINATION FAILURE CAN CAUSE LOSS OF THE BRAKE LAMPS OR THE BRAKE LAMPS TO STAY ON CONTINUOUSLY, INCREASING THE RISK OF REAR-END CRASHES.GM HAS REPORTED NO CRASHES OR INJURIES DUE TO THE FAILURE OF THE BRAKE LAMP SWITCH.ODI INITIALLY REPORTED ONE CRASH INCIDENT, BUT LATER DOWNGRADED THE REPORT DUE TO THE ABSENCE OF ACTUAL PROPERTY DAMAGE OR COST INCURRED WHEN THE VEHICLE WAS LIGHTLY TAPPED FROM BEHIND AT LOW SPEED.THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED (SEE RECALL CAMPAIGN 09V0310).
Additional source detail variants (2)
Exterior Lighting:brake Lights:switch
ON JULY 28,2009, GM INITIATED A REGIONAL RECALL CAMPAIGN ON CERTAIN MODEL YEAR (MY) 2004-2009 CHEVROLET COLORADO AND GMC CANYON VEHICLES AND MY2006-2008 ISUZU I-SERIES VEHICLES.THE STATES AND U.S. TERRITORIES INVOLVED ARE AL, AZ, FL, GA, HI, LA, MS, NV, NM, PR, SC, TX, VI AND UT.A TOTAL OF 185,903 VEHICLES WILL BE RECALLED WITH 92,272 VEHICLES WITHIN THE SCOPE OF THIS INVESTIGATION.IN ADDITION, A SPECIAL COVERAGE/EXTENDED WARRANTY PROGRAM WILL BE INITIATED FORVEHICLES REGISTERED IN ALL OTHER STATES. GM DETERMINED THAT BRAKE LAMP SWITCH FAILURES ARE MORE LIKELY TO OCCUR IN VEHICLES IN WHICH CUSTOMERS USED INTERIOR CLEANERS CONTAINING SILICON AND THAT RESIDE IN HOT GEOGRAPHICAL LOCATIONS.BRAKE LAMP SWITCH CONTAMINATION FAILURE CAN CAUSE LOSS OF THE BRAKE LAMPS OR THE BRAKE LAMPS TO STAY ON CONTINUOUSLY, INCREASING THE RISK OF REAR-END CRASHES.GM HAS REPORTED NO CRASHES OR INJURIES DUE TO THE FAILURE OF THE BRAKE LAMP SWITCH.ODI INITIALLY REPORTED ONE CRASH INCIDENT, BUT LATER DOWNGRADED THE REPORT DUE TO THE ABSENCE OF ACTUAL PROPERTY DAMAGE OR COST INCURRED WHEN THE VEHICLE WAS LIGHTLY TAPPED FROM BEHIND AT LOW SPEED.THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED (SEE RECALL CAMPAIGN 09V0310).
Exterior Lighting
ON JULY 28,2009, GM INITIATED A REGIONAL RECALL CAMPAIGN ON CERTAIN MODEL YEAR (MY) 2004-2009 CHEVROLET COLORADO AND GMC CANYON VEHICLES AND MY2006-2008 ISUZU I-SERIES VEHICLES.THE STATES AND U.S. TERRITORIES INVOLVED ARE AL, AZ, FL, GA, HI, LA, MS, NV, NM, PR, SC, TX, VI AND UT.A TOTAL OF 185,903 VEHICLES WILL BE RECALLED WITH 92,272 VEHICLES WITHIN THE SCOPE OF THIS INVESTIGATION.IN ADDITION, A SPECIAL COVERAGE/EXTENDED WARRANTY PROGRAM WILL BE INITIATED FORVEHICLES REGISTERED IN ALL OTHER STATES. GM DETERMINED THAT BRAKE LAMP SWITCH FAILURES ARE MORE LIKELY TO OCCUR IN VEHICLES IN WHICH CUSTOMERS USED INTERIOR CLEANERS CONTAINING SILICON AND THAT RESIDE IN HOT GEOGRAPHICAL LOCATIONS.BRAKE LAMP SWITCH CONTAMINATION FAILURE CAN CAUSE LOSS OF THE BRAKE LAMPS OR THE BRAKE LAMPS TO STAY ON CONTINUOUSLY, INCREASING THE RISK OF REAR-END CRASHES.GM HAS REPORTED NO CRASHES OR INJURIES DUE TO THE FAILURE OF THE BRAKE LAMP SWITCH.ODI INITIALLY REPORTED ONE CRASH INCIDENT, BUT LATER DOWNGRADED THE REPORT DUE TO THE ABSENCE OF ACTUAL PROPERTY DAMAGE OR COST INCURRED WHEN THE VEHICLE WAS LIGHTLY TAPPED FROM BEHIND AT LOW SPEED.THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED (SEE RECALL CAMPAIGN 09V0310).
PE05065 · Brake Lamp Switch Failure
Opened Dec 2, 2005 · Closed May 1, 2006
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Exterior Lighting:brake Lights:switch
BY LETTER DATED APRIL 26, 2006, GM NOTIFIED THE AGENCY THAT IT IS CONDUCTING A SAFETY RECALL (NHTSA RECALL NO. 06V139) INVOLVING CERTAIN MODEL YEAR (MY) 2004-06 CHEVROLET COLORADO, GMC CANYON AND 2006 MY ISUZU I280/I350 VEHICLES.GM'S RECALL COVERS 404,733 VEHICLES.GM REPORTS THAT LOSS OF BRAKE LAMP ILLUMINATION WAS CAUSED BY INSUFFICIENT PLATING ON THE STATIONARY CONTACT IN THE BRAKE LAMP SWITCH.GM WILL REPLACE THE BRAKE LAMP SWITCH ASSEMBLY ON ALL INVOLVED VEHICLES WITH THE NEW SWITCH THAT HAS THE INCREASED PLATING ON THE STATIONARY CONTACT.BASED ON GM'S SAFETY RECALL ACTION, THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED.
Illustration