IllustrationDT*: THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE THE VEHICLE WAS BEING SERVICED, THE PRIVATE REPAIR SHOP MECHANIC DETERMINED THAT THE INSIDES OF BOTH FRONT TIRES WERE WORN DOWN TO THE CORDS. THE MECHANIC DETERMINED THAT THE WEAR WAS DUE TO IMPROPER ALIGNMENT.*AK
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
760–25K
6425–50K
5550–75K
4575–100K
26100–150K
22150K+
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.
27 crash reports11 fire reports16 injury reports
What owners actually said
356 reportsDT: THE CONTACT STATED WHILE DRIVING AT VARIOUS SPEEDS THE VEHICLE VIBRATED. IN AN ATTEMPT TO CORRECT THE PROBLEM THE DEALER REPLACED AND BALANCED THE TIRES SEVERAL TIMES WITH NO SUCCESS. THE DEALER HAS DETERMINED THE VEHICLE PERFORMS AS DESIGNED. UPDATED 7/25/2006 - *NM
I HAVE HAD SEVERAL PROBLEMS WITH MY STEERING AND POWER STEERING PUMP. I HAVE HAD THE INTERMEDIATE STEERING COLUMN REPLACED TWICE AND THE POWER STEERING PUMP REPLACED ONCE. THERE WAS A LOUD POPPING WHEN I TURNED AND A SQUEALING ALSO. THE POPPING IS GONE FOR NOW BUT THE SQUEALING IS STILL THERE, THE DEALERSHIP SAID THAT WAS NORMAL…
Read full complaint
I HAVE HAD SEVERAL PROBLEMS WITH MY STEERING AND POWER STEERING PUMP. I HAVE HAD THE INTERMEDIATE STEERING COLUMN REPLACED TWICE AND THE POWER STEERING PUMP REPLACED ONCE. THERE WAS A LOUD POPPING WHEN I TURNED AND A SQUEALING ALSO. THE POPPING IS GONE FOR NOW BUT THE SQUEALING IS STILL THERE, THE DEALERSHIP SAID THAT WAS NORMAL. ALSO I HAD TO HAVE THE BODY MOUNTS TIGHTENED BECAUSE THEY WERE LOOSE. MY TRUCK HAS ONLY 17K ON IT, I HAD TO HAVE MY TRUCK AT THE DEALERSHIP 4 TIMES WITHIN 4 MONTHS. CURRENTLY THERE ARE NO PROBLEMS EXCEPT THE SQUEALING. *NM
ALL BRAKE LIGHTS FAILED, THEY ARE NO LONGER WORKING. *NM
DT*: THE CONTACT STATED THE BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH WAS INOPERABLE. THE DEALER HAS REPLACED THE BRAKE LIGHT SWITCH THREE TIMES. THE MANUFACTURER HAS BEEN ALERTED. UPDATED 07/11/06. *JB
I TOOK MY 2005 CHEVROLET COLORADO (PURCHASED IN LATE JUNE 2005) IN FOR A PENNSYLVANIA REQUIRED VEHICLE INSPECTION. THE INSPECTION STATION REFUSED TO INSPECT THE VEHICLE DUE TO TIRE WARE AND IMPROPER FRONT ALIGNMENT. I MADE AN APPOINTMENT AT THE DEALERSHIP TO CHECK THE PROBLEM AND VEHICLE INSPECTION. THE DEALER INFORMED ME MY …
Read full complaint
I TOOK MY 2005 CHEVROLET COLORADO (PURCHASED IN LATE JUNE 2005) IN FOR A PENNSYLVANIA REQUIRED VEHICLE INSPECTION. THE INSPECTION STATION REFUSED TO INSPECT THE VEHICLE DUE TO TIRE WARE AND IMPROPER FRONT ALIGNMENT. I MADE AN APPOINTMENT AT THE DEALERSHIP TO CHECK THE PROBLEM AND VEHICLE INSPECTION. THE DEALER INFORMED ME MY VEHICLE HAD TO MANY MILES ON IT FOR THE WARRANTY TO COVER IT. I HAVE NOT HAD THE VEHICLE FOR A YEAR YET AND THE ALIGNMENT IS ALREADY OUT AND TIRES ARE WORN. LOOKING AT YOU SITE I CAN SEE PROBLEMS WITH THESE VEHICLES FOR THE FRONT END ALIGNMENT. THE DEALER ROTATED MY TIRES AND INSPECTED MY VEHICLE. HE INFORMED ME THAT I SHOULD AS SOON AS POSSIBLE HAVE THE VEHICLE IN FOR AN ALIGNMENT. *NM
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
DT*: THE CONTACT STATED WHILE TAKING THE VEHICLE THROUGH A CAR WASH, THE ROOF OF THE VEHICLE COLLAPSED. THE VEHICLE WAS INSPECTED BY THE INSURANCE AGENCY WHO DETERMINED THE STRUCTURE WAS VERY WEAK. A LOCAL REPAIRMAN INSPECTED THE VEHICLE AND RECOMMENDED ADDING BRACING TO THE ROOF AREA. THE DEALER ALSO INSPECTED THE VEHICLE A…
Read full complaint
DT*: THE CONTACT STATED WHILE TAKING THE VEHICLE THROUGH A CAR WASH, THE ROOF OF THE VEHICLE COLLAPSED. THE VEHICLE WAS INSPECTED BY THE INSURANCE AGENCY WHO DETERMINED THE STRUCTURE WAS VERY WEAK. A LOCAL REPAIRMAN INSPECTED THE VEHICLE AND RECOMMENDED ADDING BRACING TO THE ROOF AREA. THE DEALER ALSO INSPECTED THE VEHICLE AND DETERMINED THE ROOF MAY HAVE COLLAPSED BECAUSE OF PREVIOUS DAMAGE CAUSED BY A BASEBALL THAT HIT THE ROOF. THE VEHICLE HAS FOUR DOORS.
APPLIED BRAKES AT STOP SIGN, BRAKE PEDAL WENT TO FLOOR, TRUCK FAILED TO STOP, TRUCK WENT OUT ONTO BUSY STATE ROUTE, HAD TO THROW TRUCK INTO REVERSE, IN ORDER TO PREVENT HITTING ANOTHER CAR. SURE GLAD OUR SON WHO JUST GOT HIS PERMIT DECIDED NOT TO DRIVE. HAD TOWED TO LOCAL DEALERSHIP FOR INSPECTION, THEY SAID THE RIGHT FRONT BRA…
Read full complaint
APPLIED BRAKES AT STOP SIGN, BRAKE PEDAL WENT TO FLOOR, TRUCK FAILED TO STOP, TRUCK WENT OUT ONTO BUSY STATE ROUTE, HAD TO THROW TRUCK INTO REVERSE, IN ORDER TO PREVENT HITTING ANOTHER CAR. SURE GLAD OUR SON WHO JUST GOT HIS PERMIT DECIDED NOT TO DRIVE. HAD TOWED TO LOCAL DEALERSHIP FOR INSPECTION, THEY SAID THE RIGHT FRONT BRAKE HOSE HAD BURST, TRUCK ONLY HAS 10,446 MILES ON IT. *NM
I WAS DRIVING AND MY TRUCK WAS SHAKING AND SPITTING AND SPUTTERING AND WASN'T WANTING TO RUN RIGHT. WHEN IT WAS IDLING IT WAS CHOPPY THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT CAME ON IT WAS ALMOST LIKE THE TRUCK WAS POSSESSED. I GOT TO MY FRIEND'S HOUSE AND I CHECKED TO MAKE SURE THAT IT WAS GETTING ENOUGH VOLTAGE FROM THE BATTERY LIKE MAYBE THE …
Read full complaint
I WAS DRIVING AND MY TRUCK WAS SHAKING AND SPITTING AND SPUTTERING AND WASN'T WANTING TO RUN RIGHT. WHEN IT WAS IDLING IT WAS CHOPPY THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT CAME ON IT WAS ALMOST LIKE THE TRUCK WAS POSSESSED. I GOT TO MY FRIEND'S HOUSE AND I CHECKED TO MAKE SURE THAT IT WAS GETTING ENOUGH VOLTAGE FROM THE BATTERY LIKE MAYBE THE CABLES WERE LOOSE BUT THEY WEREN'T. I CRANKED THE TRUCK BACK UP AND IT WASN'T SHAKING AND GOING CRAZY BUT WHEN IT IDEALS IT DOESN'T SOUND RIGHT/ISN'T LIKE IT SHOULD BE. *JB
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.