IllustrationBRAKES FADE WHEN STOPPING HARD. *JB
2003 Chevrolet Impala
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 Impala 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
670–25K
6625–50K
9150–75K
8175–100K
121100–150K
87150K+
513 reports with mileage · 181 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 264 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Exterior Lighting. Review the 103 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Engine. Review the 88 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
32 crash reports32 fire reports23 injury reports
Service Brakes, Hydraulic complaints
54 reportsRE: CHEVROLET IMPALA 2003 PURCHASED 4/7/2003 VIN [XXX] IN GENERAL I HAVE BEEN VERY PLEASED WITH THE VEHICLE ABOVE, BUT I HAVE HAD TWO PROBLEMS WITH THE BRAKES SINCE I PURCHASE THE CAR AND IT ONLY HAS 11,225 MILES OF DRIVING. I LIVE IN FLORIDA AND MY APARTMENT IS ON THE BEACH SO I PARK CLOSE TO THE OCEAN ABOUT 8 MONTHS OUT…
Read full complaint
RE: CHEVROLET IMPALA 2003 PURCHASED 4/7/2003 VIN [XXX] IN GENERAL I HAVE BEEN VERY PLEASED WITH THE VEHICLE ABOVE, BUT I HAVE HAD TWO PROBLEMS WITH THE BRAKES SINCE I PURCHASE THE CAR AND IT ONLY HAS 11,225 MILES OF DRIVING. I LIVE IN FLORIDA AND MY APARTMENT IS ON THE BEACH SO I PARK CLOSE TO THE OCEAN ABOUT 8 MONTHS OUT OF THE YEAR. THE FIRST PROBLEM OCCURRED AT 6,289 MILES WHEN THE BRAKES WERE APPLIED THERE WAS A VIBRATION OR GRABBING FEELING UNLIKE NORMAL SMOOTH BRAKING. THE CAR WAS TAKEN TO QUIRK CHEVROLET IN QUINCY, MA ON AUG 16, 2004. THE TECHNICIAN SAID THE BRAKES WERE RUSTED OR PITTED AND NEEDED TO BE GROUND DOWN OR REPLACED (SEE COPY OF WORK ORDER FROM QUIRK ATTACHED). I ASKED HIM HOW THIS COULD HAPPEN. HE EXPLAINED THAT THE BRAKE MECHANISM IS EXPOSED TO THE AIR AND NOT PROTECTED IN ANY WAY, SO THAT THE SALT AIR FROM THE OCEAN ENVIRONMENT COULD HAVE CAUSED THE PITTING IN THE BRAKES. THE SECOND PROBLEM OCCURRED AT 11,225 MILES WHEN THE SAME FEELING IN BRAKING WAS EXPERIENCED BY THE DRIVER. AGAIN I TOOK THE CAR FOR REPAIR AT QUIRK AND THEY REPORTED ''INSPECTED AND FOUND THE FRONT AND REAR BRAKES RUSTED BADLY, REMOVED AND REPLACED THE FRONT AND REAR BRAKE PADS AND ROTORS. THE COST ABOUT $725! PS: I TALKED WITH CUSTOMER SERVICE, VIKIE SMITH AT 1 800 222 1020 REGARDING THIS MATTER ON THIS DATE AND SHE STARTED A FILE OR REPORT IN THE COMPUTER AT THAT TIME. HER DIRECT LINE IS 866 932 4368 EXT 35336, FILE NUMBER [XXX]. ON THIS DATE WE HAD A CONFERENCE CALL WITH THE QUIRK SERVICE DEPT AND THEY TOLD ME THAT THE PROBLEM WITH MY BRAKES IS DUE TO THE FACT THAT I LIVE ON THE BEACH AND I DO NOT DRIVE THE CAR ENOUGH TO KEEP THE RUST FROM BUILDING UP ON THE BRAKES. *NM UPDATED 07/19/2012 *JS INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)
DT: CONSUMER HEARD A GRINDING NOISE WHICH SOUNDED LIKE METAL TO METAL. THE CONSUMER MADE AN APPOINTMENT WITH THE DEALER, BUT THE DEALER WAS NOT ABLE TO GET THE CONSUMERS VEHICLE IN FOR INSPECTION. CONSUMER TOOK VEHICLE TO JIMS MUFFLERS TO GET THE BRAKES FIXED. THE MECHANIC TOOK OFF ALL FOUR TIRES AND SHOWED THE CONSUMER THAT …
Read full complaint
DT: CONSUMER HEARD A GRINDING NOISE WHICH SOUNDED LIKE METAL TO METAL. THE CONSUMER MADE AN APPOINTMENT WITH THE DEALER, BUT THE DEALER WAS NOT ABLE TO GET THE CONSUMERS VEHICLE IN FOR INSPECTION. CONSUMER TOOK VEHICLE TO JIMS MUFFLERS TO GET THE BRAKES FIXED. THE MECHANIC TOOK OFF ALL FOUR TIRES AND SHOWED THE CONSUMER THAT HE NEEDED TO REPLACE FRONT AND BACK ROTORS AND PADS. THE MECHANIC THE CLEANED CALIPERS. THE CONSUMER SPENT ABOUT $500.00 FOR REPAIRS. WHEN THE DEALER LOOKED AT THE BRAKES HE STATED THAT THEY LOOKED AS IF THEY HAD SAT IN WATER. CONSUMER CLAIMED THAT VEHICLE HAD NOT BEEN IN WATER. THE MECHANIC STATED THAT MAYBE THE ROTORS OR CALIPERS WERE CONTAMINATED BECAUSE BRAKES SHOULD NOT HAVE LOOKED THAT BAD FOR THE MILES ON THE VEHICLE. THE MECHANIC DETERMINED CALIPERS MAY NOT HAVE BEEN WORKING PROPERLY SINCE THE ROTORS WERE SO RUSTY.*AK *JB
2003 IMPALA. BRAKES STARTED TO PULSATE SEVERELY AT SLIGHTLY OVER 36000 MILES. SINCE BRAKE PROBLEMS ARE USUALLY NOT COVERED BY WARRANTY (AND IT HAD EXPIRED ANYHOW), I TOOK IT TO A LOCALLY RELIABLE AUTO REPAIR GARAGE. HE SUSPECTED A WARPED FRONT ROTOR (AS I DID ALSO). REMOVED AND REPLACED BOTH FRONT ROTORS AND PADS. THE PULSATION …
Read full complaint
2003 IMPALA. BRAKES STARTED TO PULSATE SEVERELY AT SLIGHTLY OVER 36000 MILES. SINCE BRAKE PROBLEMS ARE USUALLY NOT COVERED BY WARRANTY (AND IT HAD EXPIRED ANYHOW), I TOOK IT TO A LOCALLY RELIABLE AUTO REPAIR GARAGE. HE SUSPECTED A WARPED FRONT ROTOR (AS I DID ALSO). REMOVED AND REPLACED BOTH FRONT ROTORS AND PADS. THE PULSATION WAS STILL THERE. REMOVED BOTH REAR ROTORS. BOTH WERE BADLY SCORED ON THE INSIDE - NOT VISIBLE DURING ROUTINE INSPECTION. IN ADDITION, BOTH ROTORS WERE PARTIALLY CRYSTALIZED, AGAIN ON THE INSIDE. THE PADS HERE WERE ALSO SCORED BADLY. AFTER READING REPORTS ON 2003 IMPALAS ON MYCARSTATS.COM, I DECIDED TO ADD MY COMPLAINT TO THE LIST THERE, ALL SIMILAR IN NATURE. OLD PARTS ARE NOT AVAILABLE.
THE CONSUMER HAS TWO VEHICLES A 2002 CHEVROLET SUBURBAN AND 2003 CHEVROLET IMPALA BOTH ARE EXPERIENCING PROBLEMS WITH THE BRAKE EQUIPMENT. *MR THE IMPALA HAD BADLY WARPED ROTORS ON THE RIGHT REAR. ONLY ONE ROTOR WAS BADLY WARPED. BOTH REAR ROTORS WERE SO CORRODED THAT THEY RUINED THE BRAKE PADS. THE VEHICLE ONLY HAD 18K M…
Read full complaint
THE CONSUMER HAS TWO VEHICLES A 2002 CHEVROLET SUBURBAN AND 2003 CHEVROLET IMPALA BOTH ARE EXPERIENCING PROBLEMS WITH THE BRAKE EQUIPMENT. *MR THE IMPALA HAD BADLY WARPED ROTORS ON THE RIGHT REAR. ONLY ONE ROTOR WAS BADLY WARPED. BOTH REAR ROTORS WERE SO CORRODED THAT THEY RUINED THE BRAKE PADS. THE VEHICLE ONLY HAD 18K MILES ON IT. THE SUBURBAN HAD 33K MILES WHEN THE BRAKES PRODUCED A SERIOUS GRINDING NOISE IN THE REAR. THE ROTORS WERE SO BADLY CORRODED THAT THEY DID NOT GIVE ANY WARNING. THE WEAR SENSORS WERE NOT FUNCTIONAL AND THE BRAKE PADS WERE DESTROYED DOWN TO THE BARE METAL AGAINST THE METAL ON ONE WHEEL. THE CONSUMER WAS AWARE THAT OTHERS HAVE EXPERIENCED THE SAME PROBLEM WITH SUBURBANS AND GMC PICK-UPS. 2003 CHEVROLET IMPALA VIN: [XXX] AND 2002 CHEVROLET SUBURBAN VIN: [XXX]. *SC *JB INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6). *TR
CONTACT STATED: HAVING THE SAME PROBLEM WITH BRAKES ON CAR THAT INVESTIGATION HAS BEEN LAUNCHED ON. THE BRAKES WERE GRIPPING AND VEHICLE KEPT GOING. VEHICLE EVENTUALLY STOPPED, BUT IT TOOK SOMETIME TO DO SO. ONLY HAPPENED IN THE WINTER.*AK
THIS IS NOT IN REPECT TO A ACCIDENT OR PART FAILURE. BUT I READ TODAY IN THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE ABOUT AN INVESTIGATION INTO GM TRUCKS IN THE SALT-BELT THAT HAD IMPROPER CORROSION ON THE BRAKE ROTORS, CAUSING THE BRAKES TO FAIL. I JUST BROUGHT MY 2003 CHEVY IMPALA FOR A TIRE ROTATION AT MY CALIFORNIA MECHANIC. THE MECHANIC NOTI…
Read full complaint
THIS IS NOT IN REPECT TO A ACCIDENT OR PART FAILURE. BUT I READ TODAY IN THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE ABOUT AN INVESTIGATION INTO GM TRUCKS IN THE SALT-BELT THAT HAD IMPROPER CORROSION ON THE BRAKE ROTORS, CAUSING THE BRAKES TO FAIL. I JUST BROUGHT MY 2003 CHEVY IMPALA FOR A TIRE ROTATION AT MY CALIFORNIA MECHANIC. THE MECHANIC NOTIFIED MY THAT THE REAR BRAKE ROTORS WERE SHOWING AN UNUSUAL CORROSION. HE SAID THAT ROAD SALT IN ILLINOIS, WHERE THE CAR IS USED 50% OF THE YEAR, MAY HAVE BEEN A REASON, BUT IT DIDN'T LOOK LIKE THE USUAL CORROSION HE IS USED TO SEEING ON SALT BELT CARS. THE BRAKES HAVE BEEN PULSING RATHER STRANGELY AND MY BRAKING DISTANCE SEEMS INCREASED SINCE THE LAST TIME I LEFT ILLINOIS. I WAS WONDERING IF THERE WERE OTHER NON-TRUCK COMPLAINTS OF THIS NATURE, GIVEN THE SIMILARITIES BETWEEN MY EXPERIANCE AND THE TRUCK INVESTIGATION?
I OWN A 2003 IMPALA. AT 16000 MILES I HAD TO REPLACE ALL FOUR ROTORS AND BRAKE PADS.*AK
BRAKES MADE GRINDING NOISE WHEN APPLIED ( 7403 MILES ), PULSATION HEARD AND FELT,RIGHT REAR ROTOR SEVERALLY PITTED,TURNEDREMAINING 3 ROTORS AND SANDED PADS.PERFORMED ROAD VARIATION TEST ON TIRES RIGHT FRONT FAILED AND WAS REPLACED. AT 15334 MILES SAME PROBLEM, SURFACE OF ROTORS FOUND TO BE VERY CORRODED,RESURFACED FRONT…
Read full complaint
BRAKES MADE GRINDING NOISE WHEN APPLIED ( 7403 MILES ), PULSATION HEARD AND FELT,RIGHT REAR ROTOR SEVERALLY PITTED,TURNEDREMAINING 3 ROTORS AND SANDED PADS.PERFORMED ROAD VARIATION TEST ON TIRES RIGHT FRONT FAILED AND WAS REPLACED. AT 15334 MILES SAME PROBLEM, SURFACE OF ROTORS FOUND TO BE VERY CORRODED,RESURFACED FRONT BRAKE ROTORS AND REPLACED REAR BRAKE ROTORS, ALSO SENT A PRODUCT REPORT TO GM AND ATTENTION OF SHOP FOREMAN AND FACTORY REP. AT 18728 MILES ROTORS CORRODED AGAIN RESURFACED.THIS IS THIRD TIME FOR BRAKE PROBLEMS I AM NOT CONFIDENT IN DRIVING THIS 2003 CHEV IMPALA AND I HAVE HEARD NUMEROUS COMPLAINTS FOR THE SAME PROBLEM ( UNSAFE ) THE FACTORY REP. OFFERED ME $1000 VOUCHER TOWARD A NEW CAR. I HAVE ALL THE NAMES AND DOCUMENTION IN MY FILES.*AK
WHILE DRIVING THE VEHICLE'S BRAKES FAILED. *NM THE CONSUMER STATED THE ABS DID PERFORM AS DESIGNED. *JB
Official recalls
515V701000 · Engine And Engine Cooling:engine; Engine And Engine Cooling:exhaust System:manifold/header/muffler/tail Pipe
Oct 26, 2015
General Motors LLC (GM) is recalling certain model year 1998-1999 Chevrolet Lumina and Oldsmobile Intrigue, 1997-2004 Buick Regal and Pontiac Grand Prix, 2000-2004 Chevrolet Impala, and 1998-2004 Chevrolet Monte Carlo vehicles. The affected vehicles were previously repaired under recalls 08V-118, 09V-116, and 15V-201 to address the possibility that engine oil may drip onto the hot exhaust manifold.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: Engine oil that drips onto the hot surface of the exhaust manifold may result in a fire.
Remedy: The remedy applied under recalls 08V-118, 09V-116, and 15V-201 did not adequately remove the safety risk. Under the improved remedy, dealers will replace the engines front valve cover and gasket. Vehicles that are covered by recalls 08V-118, 09V-116, or 15V-201 that have not yet received the original remedy will instead receive the improved remedy under the original recall number. The recall began on February 19, 2016. Owners may contact Chevrolet customer service at 1-800-222-1020, Buick customer service at 1-800-521-7300, Oldsmobile customer service at 1-800-442-6537 and Pontiac customer service at 1-800-458-8006. GM's number for this recall is 15757. Note: Until the improved remedy has been applied, owners are advised to park their vehicle outside since the fire risk exists even when the vehicle is unattended.
Additional source detail variants (2)
Engine And Engine Cooling:exhaust System:manifold/header/muffler/tail Pipe
General Motors LLC (GM) is recalling certain model year 1998-1999 Chevrolet Lumina and Oldsmobile Intrigue, 1997-2004 Buick Regal and Pontiac Grand Prix, 2000-2004 Chevrolet Impala, and 1998-2004 Chevrolet Monte Carlo vehicles. The affected vehicles were previously repaired under recalls 08V-118, 09V-116, and 15V-201 to address the possibility that engine oil may drip onto the hot exhaust manifold.
Consequence: Engine oil that drips onto the hot surface of the exhaust manifold may result in a fire.
Remedy: The remedy applied under recalls 08V-118, 09V-116, and 15V-201 did not adequately remove the safety risk. Under the improved remedy, dealers will replace the engines front valve cover and gasket. Vehicles that are covered by recalls 08V-118, 09V-116, or 15V-201 that have not yet received the original remedy will instead receive the improved remedy under the original recall number. The recall began on February 19, 2016. Owners may contact Chevrolet customer service at 1-800-222-1020, Buick customer service at 1-800-521-7300, Oldsmobile customer service at 1-800-442-6537 and Pontiac customer service at 1-800-458-8006. GM's number for this recall is 15757. Note: Until the improved remedy has been applied, owners are advised to park their vehicle outside since the fire risk exists even when the vehicle is unattended.
Engine And Engine Cooling:engine
General Motors LLC (GM) is recalling certain model year 1998-1999 Chevrolet Lumina and Oldsmobile Intrigue, 1997-2004 Buick Regal and Pontiac Grand Prix, 2000-2004 Chevrolet Impala, and 1998-2004 Chevrolet Monte Carlo vehicles. The affected vehicles were previously repaired under recalls 08V-118, 09V-116, and 15V-201 to address the possibility that engine oil may drip onto the hot exhaust manifold.
Consequence: Engine oil that drips onto the hot surface of the exhaust manifold may result in a fire.
Remedy: The remedy applied under recalls 08V-118, 09V-116, and 15V-201 did not adequately remove the safety risk. Under the improved remedy, dealers will replace the engines front valve cover and gasket. Vehicles that are covered by recalls 08V-118, 09V-116, or 15V-201 that have not yet received the original remedy will instead receive the improved remedy under the original recall number. The recall began on February 19, 2016. Owners may contact Chevrolet customer service at 1-800-222-1020, Buick customer service at 1-800-521-7300, Oldsmobile customer service at 1-800-442-6537 and Pontiac customer service at 1-800-458-8006. GM's number for this recall is 15757. Note: Until the improved remedy has been applied, owners are advised to park their vehicle outside since the fire risk exists even when the vehicle is unattended.
14V400000 · Electrical System:ignition
Jul 3, 2014
This defect can affect the safe operation of the airbag system. Until this recall is performed, customers should remove all items from their key rings, leaving only the ignition key. The key fob (if applicable), should also be removed from the key ring. General Motors LLC (GM) notified the agency on July 3, 2014, that they are recalling 5,877,718 model year 2000-2005 Chevrolet Impala and Monte Carlo, 1997-2003 Chevrolet Malibu, 2004-2005 Malibu Classic, 1999-2004 Oldsmobile Alero, 1998-2002 Oldsmobile Intrigue, 1999-2005 Pontiac Grand Am and 2004-2008 Pontiac Grand Prix vehicles. In these models, the weight on the key ring and/or road conditions or some other jarring event may cause the ignition switch to move out of the run position, turning off the engine.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: If the key is not in the run position, the air bags may not deploy if the vehicle is involved in a crash, increasing the risk of injury.
Remedy: GM will notify owners, and dealers will install two key rings and an insert in the key slot or a cover over the key head on all ignition keys, free of charge. The recall began on September 9, 2014. GM's number for this recall is 14350.
09V116000 · Engine And Engine Cooling
Apr 8, 2009
GENERAL MOTORS IS RECALLING 1,497,516 MY 1997-2003 BUICK REGAL, MY 1998-2003 CHEVROLET LUMINA, MONTE CARLO AND IMPALA, MY 1998-1999 OLDSMOBILE INTRIGUE, MY 1997-2003 PONTIAC GRAND PRIX VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH A 3.8L V6 NATURALLY ASPIRATED ENGINE. SOME OF THESE VEHICLES HAVE A CONDITION IN WHICH DROPS OF ENGINE OIL MAY BE DEPOSITED ON THE EXHAUST MANIFOLD THROUGH HARD BRAKING.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: IF THE MANIFOLD IS HOT ENOUGH AND THE OIL RUNS BELOW THE HEAT SHIELD, IT MAY IGNITE INTO A SMALL FLAME AND MAY SPREAD TO THE PLASTIC SPARK PLUG WIRE CHANNEL AND BEYOND INCREASING THE RISK OF AN ENGINE COMPARTMENT FIRE.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL REPLACE THE ENGINES FRONT VALVE COVER AND FRONT-VALVE-COVER GASKET WITH NEW PARTS OF AN IMPROVED DESIGN AND REMOVE THE ENGINES PLASTIC COVER AND PLASTIC OIL-FILL-TUBE EXTENSION, FREE OF CHARGE. THE RECALL IS EXPECTED TO BEGIN DURING MAY 2016. OWNERS MAY CONTACT CHEVROLET AT 1-800-630-2438, OLDSMOBILE AT 1-800-630-6537, AND PONTIAC AT 1-800-620-7668 OR HTTP://WWW.PONTIAC.COM OR HTTP:WWW.GMOWNERCENTER.COM.
03V051000 · Air Bags:frontal:driver Side:inflator Module
Feb 14, 2003
ON CERTAIN MINI VANS, PASSENGER AND SPORT UTILITY VEHICLES, SOME OF THESE VEHICLES HAVE A DRIVER'S SIDE AIR BAG THAT MAY NOT DEPLOY AS DESIGNED. IN ADDITION, THE AIR BAG INFLATOR COULD RUPTURE.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: THIS COULD RESULT IN REDUCED CAPABILITY OF THE AIR BAG TO PROTECT THE DRIVER. ALSO IF THE AIR BAG INFLATOR RUPTURED, PIECES OF THE INFLATOR COULD STRIKE AND INJURE THE VEHICLE OCCUPANTS.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL INSPECT, AND IF NECESSARY, INSTALL A NEW DRIVER'S AIR BAG. OWNER NOTIFICATION BEGAN ON MARCH 11, 2003. 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 BUICK AT 1-800-521-7300, CADILLAC AT 1-800-458-8006, CHEVROLET AT 1-800-222-1020, GMC AT 1-800-462-8782, OR PONTIAC AT 1-800-762-2737.
02V222000 · Air Bags:frontal
Aug 9, 2002
CERTAIN PASSENGER, MINI VANS, AND SPORT UTILITY VEHICLES HAVE AN AIR BAG INFLATOR ON THE DRIVER'S SIDE THAT COULD FRACTURE AT A WELD DURING A DEPLOYMENT.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: PIECES OF THE INFLATOR COULD STRIKE AND INJURE VEHICLE OCCUPANTS AND THE AIR BAG CUSHION WOULD NOT INFLATE FULLY, REDUCING THE CAPABILITY OF THE BAG TO PROTECT THE DRIVER.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL INSPECT, AND REPLACE, IF NECESSARY, THE AIR BAG MODULE ASSEMBLY ON THE DRIVER'S SIDE. OWNER NOTIFICATION BEGAN AUGUST 15, 2002. 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 BUICK AT 1-800-521-7300, CADILLAC AT 1-800-458-8006, CHEVROLET AT 1-800-222-1020, GMC AT 1-800-462-8782, OLDSMOBILE AT 1-800-442-6537, OR PONTIAC AT 1-800-762-2737.
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
1PE06017 · Alleged Headlight Failure
Opened May 15, 2006 · Closed Oct 25, 2006
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Exterior Lighting; Exterior Lighting:headlights; Exterior Lighting:headlights:switch
A TOTAL OF 646,038 SUBJECT VEHICLES WERE SOLD DURING MY 2001-2003, AND THE COMPLAINT AND WARRANTY DATA TABULATED ABOVE APPLY TO THE TOTAL VEHICLE POPULATION.COMPLAINT REPORTS ALLEGING HEADLIGHT OUTAGE REPRESENT SLIGHTLY MORE THAT ONE-HALF OF THE TOTAL NUMBER OF COMPLAINTS AND THE BALANCE ARE ALLEGATIONS OF FLICKERING AND DIMMING.INVESTIGATION DISCLOSED THE ROOT CAUSE OF THE MALFUNCTION TO BE WEAR OF A CONTACT PLUNGER IN THE MULTIFUNCTION SWITCH THAT MAY RESULT IN A TEMPORARY OPEN CIRCUIT, WITH THE PLUNGER IN A NEUTRAL POSITION BETWEEN HIGH- AND LOW-BEAM CONTACT POINTS.CONSUMERS CONSISTENTLY REPORTED THAT MANIPULATION OF THE SWITCH HANDLE ON THE STEERING COLUMN RESTORES EITHER HIGH OR LOW BEAM HEADLIGHT FUNCTION.NO OTHER POTENTIAL SAFETY RELATED ISSUES, E.G., FIRES OR WINDSHIELD WIPER FAILURE, WERE FOUND TO BE RELATED TO THIS ISSUE.THE MANUFACTURER RECOGNIZED THE SUBJECT HEADLIGHT ISSUES FROM FAILURE AND WARRANTY REPORTS, AND ISSUED A REDESIGNED PLUNGER IN 2003. THE MANUFACTURER DID NOT IDENTIFY A DEFECT REQUIRING RECALL AND REMEDY.ODI HAS DETERMINED THAT THE RATES OF OCCURRENCE, THE FAILURE MODE AND THE REAL-WORLD CONSEQUENCE OF THE ALLEGED DEFECT AS COMPARED TO OTHER SIMILAR INVESTIGATIONS FAIL TO IDENTIFY A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT TREND.THIS PRELIMINARY EVALUATION HAS BEEN CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING THAT A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT DOES NOT EXIST.THE AGENCY MAY TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES.
Additional source detail variants (3)
Exterior Lighting
A TOTAL OF 646,038 SUBJECT VEHICLES WERE SOLD DURING MY 2001-2003, AND THE COMPLAINT AND WARRANTY DATA TABULATED ABOVE APPLY TO THE TOTAL VEHICLE POPULATION.COMPLAINT REPORTS ALLEGING HEADLIGHT OUTAGE REPRESENT SLIGHTLY MORE THAT ONE-HALF OF THE TOTAL NUMBER OF COMPLAINTS AND THE BALANCE ARE ALLEGATIONS OF FLICKERING AND DIMMING.INVESTIGATION DISCLOSED THE ROOT CAUSE OF THE MALFUNCTION TO BE WEAR OF A CONTACT PLUNGER IN THE MULTIFUNCTION SWITCH THAT MAY RESULT IN A TEMPORARY OPEN CIRCUIT, WITH THE PLUNGER IN A NEUTRAL POSITION BETWEEN HIGH- AND LOW-BEAM CONTACT POINTS.CONSUMERS CONSISTENTLY REPORTED THAT MANIPULATION OF THE SWITCH HANDLE ON THE STEERING COLUMN RESTORES EITHER HIGH OR LOW BEAM HEADLIGHT FUNCTION.NO OTHER POTENTIAL SAFETY RELATED ISSUES, E.G., FIRES OR WINDSHIELD WIPER FAILURE, WERE FOUND TO BE RELATED TO THIS ISSUE.THE MANUFACTURER RECOGNIZED THE SUBJECT HEADLIGHT ISSUES FROM FAILURE AND WARRANTY REPORTS, AND ISSUED A REDESIGNED PLUNGER IN 2003. THE MANUFACTURER DID NOT IDENTIFY A DEFECT REQUIRING RECALL AND REMEDY.ODI HAS DETERMINED THAT THE RATES OF OCCURRENCE, THE FAILURE MODE AND THE REAL-WORLD CONSEQUENCE OF THE ALLEGED DEFECT AS COMPARED TO OTHER SIMILAR INVESTIGATIONS FAIL TO IDENTIFY A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT TREND.THIS PRELIMINARY EVALUATION HAS BEEN CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING THAT A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT DOES NOT EXIST.THE AGENCY MAY TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES.
Exterior Lighting:headlights
A TOTAL OF 646,038 SUBJECT VEHICLES WERE SOLD DURING MY 2001-2003, AND THE COMPLAINT AND WARRANTY DATA TABULATED ABOVE APPLY TO THE TOTAL VEHICLE POPULATION.COMPLAINT REPORTS ALLEGING HEADLIGHT OUTAGE REPRESENT SLIGHTLY MORE THAT ONE-HALF OF THE TOTAL NUMBER OF COMPLAINTS AND THE BALANCE ARE ALLEGATIONS OF FLICKERING AND DIMMING.INVESTIGATION DISCLOSED THE ROOT CAUSE OF THE MALFUNCTION TO BE WEAR OF A CONTACT PLUNGER IN THE MULTIFUNCTION SWITCH THAT MAY RESULT IN A TEMPORARY OPEN CIRCUIT, WITH THE PLUNGER IN A NEUTRAL POSITION BETWEEN HIGH- AND LOW-BEAM CONTACT POINTS.CONSUMERS CONSISTENTLY REPORTED THAT MANIPULATION OF THE SWITCH HANDLE ON THE STEERING COLUMN RESTORES EITHER HIGH OR LOW BEAM HEADLIGHT FUNCTION.NO OTHER POTENTIAL SAFETY RELATED ISSUES, E.G., FIRES OR WINDSHIELD WIPER FAILURE, WERE FOUND TO BE RELATED TO THIS ISSUE.THE MANUFACTURER RECOGNIZED THE SUBJECT HEADLIGHT ISSUES FROM FAILURE AND WARRANTY REPORTS, AND ISSUED A REDESIGNED PLUNGER IN 2003. THE MANUFACTURER DID NOT IDENTIFY A DEFECT REQUIRING RECALL AND REMEDY.ODI HAS DETERMINED THAT THE RATES OF OCCURRENCE, THE FAILURE MODE AND THE REAL-WORLD CONSEQUENCE OF THE ALLEGED DEFECT AS COMPARED TO OTHER SIMILAR INVESTIGATIONS FAIL TO IDENTIFY A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT TREND.THIS PRELIMINARY EVALUATION HAS BEEN CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING THAT A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT DOES NOT EXIST.THE AGENCY MAY TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES.
Exterior Lighting:headlights:switch
A TOTAL OF 646,038 SUBJECT VEHICLES WERE SOLD DURING MY 2001-2003, AND THE COMPLAINT AND WARRANTY DATA TABULATED ABOVE APPLY TO THE TOTAL VEHICLE POPULATION.COMPLAINT REPORTS ALLEGING HEADLIGHT OUTAGE REPRESENT SLIGHTLY MORE THAT ONE-HALF OF THE TOTAL NUMBER OF COMPLAINTS AND THE BALANCE ARE ALLEGATIONS OF FLICKERING AND DIMMING.INVESTIGATION DISCLOSED THE ROOT CAUSE OF THE MALFUNCTION TO BE WEAR OF A CONTACT PLUNGER IN THE MULTIFUNCTION SWITCH THAT MAY RESULT IN A TEMPORARY OPEN CIRCUIT, WITH THE PLUNGER IN A NEUTRAL POSITION BETWEEN HIGH- AND LOW-BEAM CONTACT POINTS.CONSUMERS CONSISTENTLY REPORTED THAT MANIPULATION OF THE SWITCH HANDLE ON THE STEERING COLUMN RESTORES EITHER HIGH OR LOW BEAM HEADLIGHT FUNCTION.NO OTHER POTENTIAL SAFETY RELATED ISSUES, E.G., FIRES OR WINDSHIELD WIPER FAILURE, WERE FOUND TO BE RELATED TO THIS ISSUE.THE MANUFACTURER RECOGNIZED THE SUBJECT HEADLIGHT ISSUES FROM FAILURE AND WARRANTY REPORTS, AND ISSUED A REDESIGNED PLUNGER IN 2003. THE MANUFACTURER DID NOT IDENTIFY A DEFECT REQUIRING RECALL AND REMEDY.ODI HAS DETERMINED THAT THE RATES OF OCCURRENCE, THE FAILURE MODE AND THE REAL-WORLD CONSEQUENCE OF THE ALLEGED DEFECT AS COMPARED TO OTHER SIMILAR INVESTIGATIONS FAIL TO IDENTIFY A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT TREND.THIS PRELIMINARY EVALUATION HAS BEEN CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING THAT A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT DOES NOT EXIST.THE AGENCY MAY TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES.