IllustrationBOTH LOW BEAM HEADLIGHTS QUIT WORKING WHILE DRIVING THE VEHICLE.
2008 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
890–25K
11125–50K
14950–75K
11675–100K
141100–150K
59150K+
665 reports with mileage · 145 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 221 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Engine. Review the 134 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Suspension. Review the 117 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
51 crash reports10 fire reports36 injury reports
Exterior Lighting complaints
4 reportsI WAS LEAVING A HIGH SCHOOL AT NIGHT AFTER BASKETBALL GAME. CRANKED CAR AND STARTED DRIVING. ALL LIGHTS WORKING FINE. IT WAS ON AUTO LIGHTS. ABOUT FIVE MINUTES UP THE ROAD ALL OUTSIDE LIGHTS QUIT WORKING. THEY JUST STOPPED. PULLED OVER AND TURNED LIGHTS ON AND OFF....STILL NOT WORKING. SWITCHED FROM AUTO TO MANUAL HEADLIGHTS. ON…
Read full complaint
I WAS LEAVING A HIGH SCHOOL AT NIGHT AFTER BASKETBALL GAME. CRANKED CAR AND STARTED DRIVING. ALL LIGHTS WORKING FINE. IT WAS ON AUTO LIGHTS. ABOUT FIVE MINUTES UP THE ROAD ALL OUTSIDE LIGHTS QUIT WORKING. THEY JUST STOPPED. PULLED OVER AND TURNED LIGHTS ON AND OFF....STILL NOT WORKING. SWITCHED FROM AUTO TO MANUAL HEADLIGHTS. ONLY HIGH BEAM WORKED. AND THEN ONLY LEFT SIDE. LOW BEAM NOT WORKING AT ALL. IF I TRIED TO DIM LIGHTS....THEN THEY CUT OFF. *TR
THE LOW BEAM HEADLIGHT ON THE PASSENGER SIDE KEEPS GOING OUT. I HAVE REPLACED THE BULBS MANY TIMES, BUT THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH THE BULBS. I DON'T KNOW IF THERE IS A PROBLEM WITH THE CONNECTOR THE BULB GOES INTO OR IF THERE IS AN ELECTRICAL SHORT PROBLEM. I BELIEVE GM KNOWS ABOUT THE PROBLEM, BUT WON'T DO A RECALL. I HAV…
Read full complaint
THE LOW BEAM HEADLIGHT ON THE PASSENGER SIDE KEEPS GOING OUT. I HAVE REPLACED THE BULBS MANY TIMES, BUT THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH THE BULBS. I DON'T KNOW IF THERE IS A PROBLEM WITH THE CONNECTOR THE BULB GOES INTO OR IF THERE IS AN ELECTRICAL SHORT PROBLEM. I BELIEVE GM KNOWS ABOUT THE PROBLEM, BUT WON'T DO A RECALL. I HAVE SEEN THE SAME COMPLAINT AS MINE ALL OVER THE WEB. SINCE THIS PROBLEM HAS NOT CAUSED ANY FATALITIES THAT I'M AWARE OF, THERE IS NO REAL PRESSURE COMING FROM ENOUGH CONSUMERS TO WARRANT A RECALL. I AM HOPING THAT IF YOUR ORGANIZATION ADDS ITS CONSIDERABLE WEIGHT TO REQUESTING THAT GM DOES A RECALL ON THIS PROBLEM, IT MIGHT HELP.
I RENTED A CAR AND IT WAS A CHEVY IMPALA WHERE I COULD NOT TURN OFF THE HEADLIGHTS, SEPTEMBER IN PHOENIX. I DID A AAA DEFENSIVE DRIVING COURSE TODAY IN NY AND LEARNED THAT THE PUSH IS TO CONVINCE EVERYONE THEY ARE SAFER IN BROAD DAYLIGHT IF ONLY THEY'D TURN THEIR HEADLIGHTS ON -- AND THAT THIS IS BEING PROMOTED FOR LEGISLATION.…
Read full complaint
I RENTED A CAR AND IT WAS A CHEVY IMPALA WHERE I COULD NOT TURN OFF THE HEADLIGHTS, SEPTEMBER IN PHOENIX. I DID A AAA DEFENSIVE DRIVING COURSE TODAY IN NY AND LEARNED THAT THE PUSH IS TO CONVINCE EVERYONE THEY ARE SAFER IN BROAD DAYLIGHT IF ONLY THEY'D TURN THEIR HEADLIGHTS ON -- AND THAT THIS IS BEING PROMOTED FOR LEGISLATION. IT IS INFURIATING NOT TO BE ABLE TO TURN OFF HEADLIGHTS IN PLACES WHERE IT IS RUDE TO KEEP THEM ON -- WAITING IN A PARKING LOT, WATCHING THE VIEW WITH THE HEATER ON, MY DRIVEWAY WHILE YOU'RE PARKED AND TALKING. I AM ANGRILY OPPOSED TO THE NOTION THAT I SHOULD EVER BY LAW BE REQUIRED TO KEEP HEADLIGHTS ON ALL DAY -- AND I AM DISTURBED BY THE NOTION THAT ONE DAY I MAY NEED TO BUY A CAR WHERE THERE IS NO LONGER THE OPTION TO TURN THE HEADLIGHTS OFF. THE CONSTANT HEADLIGHTS IDEA WAS A CUTE SAFETY PROMOTION THING, BUT IT IS PREPOSTEROUS AND IGNORANT AS EITHER A LAW OR A MANUFACTURING REQUIREMENT. I PERSONALLY AM AGGRAVATED BY THE EXCESSIVE LIGHTS AND LIGHTING ON ROADS AND ROADSIGNS AND OVER-POWERED HEADLIGHTS ON CARS AND ROOF-LEVEL HEADLIGHTS ON SUVS -- I AM RELIEVED THAT THIS AGGRAVATION AND DANGEROUS DISTRACTION GOES AWAY WITH ITS NECESSITY AT DAWN. I DON'T EVER WANT TO GET STUCK WITH ANOTHER CAR WHERE I CANNOT TURN OFF THE HEADLIGHTS: IT'S RUDE, IT'S PERCEIVED AS AN INVASION OF PRIVACY, IT'S PERCEIVED AS AN ACT OF AGGRESSION, IT BLINDS PEOPLE WITH GLARE AND A SPOTLIGHT EFFECT AND IT IS UNNECESSARY UNLESS VISIBILITY IS COMPROMISED AND YOU ARE ACTUALLY DRIVING. I'M COMPLAINING ABOUT THE AAA DEFENSIVE DRIVING COURSE PUSH FOR CONSTANT HEADLIGHTS WHICH I SEE AS AGGRAVATING LIGHT POLLUTION AND WASTE OF ENERGY AND RESOURCES; AND I'M COMPLAINING THAT CHEVROLET CAN PUT A CAR INTO PRODUCTION WITHOUT THE OPTION TO TURN OFF IT'S HEADLIGHTS. ADDITIONALLY, I SHOULD COMPLAIN THAT THE SUPER-BRIGHT LUXURY CAR AND GIANT SUV HEADLIGHTS BOTH CREATE HAZARDS FOR ME WHILE DRIVING. I DON'T WEAR GLASSES AND DON'T HAVE VISION PROBLEMS - COMMON SENSE, AGE 40. *TR
Official recalls
214V355000 · Electrical System:ignition
Jun 23, 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) is recalling certain model year 2005-2009 Buick LaCrosse, 2006-2011 Buick Lucerne, 2000-2005 Cadillac DeVille, 2006-2011 Cadillac DTS, 2006-2014 Chevrolet Impala, and 2006-2007 Chevrolet Monte Carlo vehicles. In the affected vehicles, the weight on the key ring and 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. Additionally, a key knocked out of the run position will cause loss of engine power, power steering, and power braking, increasing the risk of a vehicle crash.
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 23, 2014. Owners may contact General Motors customer service at 1-800-521-7300 (Buick), 1-800-458-8006 (Cadillac), and 1-800-222-1020 (Chevrolet). GM's number for this recall is 14299.
12V377000 · Suspension:front:control Arm:lower Arm
Aug 3, 2012
General Motors (GM) is recalling certain model year 2008-2012 Chevrolet Impala police vehicles because the front lower control arms may fracture. This safety recall does not include non-police Chevrolet Impala vehicles.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: A broken control arm can result in the loss of control of the vehicle, increasing the risk of a crash.
Remedy: GM will notify owners, and dealers will replace both front lower control arms, free of charge. The safety recall began on August 21, 2012. Owners may contact the Chevrolet owner center at 1-866-694-6546.
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
1DP14001 · Passenger Air Bag Ocs Algorithm
Opened Jul 22, 2014 · Closed Mar 7, 2017
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Air Bags; Air Bags:frontal:sensor/control MODULE-INACTIVE
The Agency received a petition on November 14, 2013 requesting an investigation into the operation of the passenger air bag Occupant Classification System (OCS) software logic and algorithm.The petitioner states that due to this alleged defect, the passenger air bag may be suppressed at point of impact and not provided the occupant protection as needed in a crash.On July 22, 2014, NHTSA opened DP14-001 to further review the crash event and perform a more comprehensive search and analysis of the Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS).The Agency also collected manufacturers reports on the alleged OCS issue on the subject Impala vehicles and other GM and non-GM peer vehicles.After examination of the petition and available data relating to the subject vehicle's OCS and the specific crash incident where the OCS allegedly failed to operate properly, NHTSA did not identify an issue with the MY2008 Impala involved in the subject crash, nor has it identified a safety-related defect trend existing in the OCS used in the MY 2006-2008 Impala vehicles, in GM peer vehicles or in other non-GM peer vehicles.NHTSA has concluded that further expenditure of the agency's investigative resources is not warranted. The agency accordingly has denied the petition.However, the agency will take further action if warranted by changing future circumstances. The official petition denial, as published in the Federal Register, is available in the document file for this defect petition.The single complaint and crash noted in the Failure Report above is the petitioner's VOQ (10568388) and can be reviewed online at https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls?nhtsaId=10568388.
Additional source detail variants (2)
Air Bags:frontal:sensor/control MODULE-INACTIVE
The Agency received a petition on November 14, 2013 requesting an investigation into the operation of the passenger air bag Occupant Classification System (OCS) software logic and algorithm.The petitioner states that due to this alleged defect, the passenger air bag may be suppressed at point of impact and not provided the occupant protection as needed in a crash.On July 22, 2014, NHTSA opened DP14-001 to further review the crash event and perform a more comprehensive search and analysis of the Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS).The Agency also collected manufacturers reports on the alleged OCS issue on the subject Impala vehicles and other GM and non-GM peer vehicles.After examination of the petition and available data relating to the subject vehicle's OCS and the specific crash incident where the OCS allegedly failed to operate properly, NHTSA did not identify an issue with the MY2008 Impala involved in the subject crash, nor has it identified a safety-related defect trend existing in the OCS used in the MY 2006-2008 Impala vehicles, in GM peer vehicles or in other non-GM peer vehicles.NHTSA has concluded that further expenditure of the agency's investigative resources is not warranted. The agency accordingly has denied the petition.However, the agency will take further action if warranted by changing future circumstances. The official petition denial, as published in the Federal Register, is available in the document file for this defect petition.The single complaint and crash noted in the Failure Report above is the petitioner's VOQ (10568388) and can be reviewed online at https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls?nhtsaId=10568388.
Air Bags
The Agency received a petition on November 14, 2013 requesting an investigation into the operation of the passenger air bag Occupant Classification System (OCS) software logic and algorithm.The petitioner states that due to this alleged defect, the passenger air bag may be suppressed at point of impact and not provided the occupant protection as needed in a crash.On July 22, 2014, NHTSA opened DP14-001 to further review the crash event and perform a more comprehensive search and analysis of the Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS).The Agency also collected manufacturers reports on the alleged OCS issue on the subject Impala vehicles and other GM and non-GM peer vehicles.After examination of the petition and available data relating to the subject vehicle's OCS and the specific crash incident where the OCS allegedly failed to operate properly, NHTSA did not identify an issue with the MY2008 Impala involved in the subject crash, nor has it identified a safety-related defect trend existing in the OCS used in the MY 2006-2008 Impala vehicles, in GM peer vehicles or in other non-GM peer vehicles.NHTSA has concluded that further expenditure of the agency's investigative resources is not warranted. The agency accordingly has denied the petition.However, the agency will take further action if warranted by changing future circumstances. The official petition denial, as published in the Federal Register, is available in the document file for this defect petition.The single complaint and crash noted in the Failure Report above is the petitioner's VOQ (10568388) and can be reviewed online at https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls?nhtsaId=10568388.