IllustrationTAKATA RECALL I WAS INVOLVED IN A ACCIDENT 10-10-2016 AT 9:10AM, A VEHICLE PULLED IN FRONT OF ME CAUSING ME TO HIT THEM WITH THE FRONT OF MY TRUCK, THE DRIVER SIDE AIRBAG DID NOT DEPLOY...UPDATED 10/28/16 *BF *TR
2001 Chevrolet S10
Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations
More warning signs than most S10 years
Owner complaints for the 2001 Chevrolet S10 are substantially higher than the model-year median of 42.5.
About this comparison →How this year compares
Owner complaints by model year
Compare all S10 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
240–25K
7025–50K
4050–75K
2875–100K
14100–150K
10150K+
186 reports with mileage · 122 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.
- Structure. Review the 75 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Service Brakes, Hydraulic. Review the 50 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Electrical System. Review the 28 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
20 crash reports6 fire reports22 injury reports
Air Bags complaints
12 reportsTL* THE CONTACT OWNED A 2001 CHEVROLET S10. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE VEHICLE CRASHED INTO A LIGHT POLE, BUT THE AIR BAGS DID NOT DEPLOY. THE CONTACT MENTIONED THAT THE DRIVER HIT HIS HEAD ON THE WINDSHIELD UPON IMPACT. A POLICE REPORT WAS FILED. THE DRIVER RECEIVED STITCHES AND COMPLAINED THAT HIS BACK AND NECK WERE CONSTANTL…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNED A 2001 CHEVROLET S10. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE VEHICLE CRASHED INTO A LIGHT POLE, BUT THE AIR BAGS DID NOT DEPLOY. THE CONTACT MENTIONED THAT THE DRIVER HIT HIS HEAD ON THE WINDSHIELD UPON IMPACT. A POLICE REPORT WAS FILED. THE DRIVER RECEIVED STITCHES AND COMPLAINED THAT HIS BACK AND NECK WERE CONSTANTLY HURTING. HE ALSO SUSTAINED BRUISES AND ABRASIONS. THE VEHICLE WAS DECLARED DESTROYED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGES WERE 180,000.
FAILURE OF AIRBAGS TO DEPLOY DURING AN AUTO ACCIDENT. *JB
DT*: THE CONSUMER STATED WHILE DRIVING AT 35 MPH ANOTHER VEHICLE CAME ACROSS THE MEDIAN AND CRASHED INTO THE VEHICLE. UPON IMPACT THE DRIVER'S SEAT BELT FAILED TO LOCK AND BOTH FRONTAL AIRBAGS FAILED TO DEPLOY. THE CONSUMER SUSTAINED INJURIES TO THE NECK AND BACK. THERE WAS A FIRE COMING FROM THE ENGINE AREA AFTER IMPACT. T…
Read full complaint
DT*: THE CONSUMER STATED WHILE DRIVING AT 35 MPH ANOTHER VEHICLE CAME ACROSS THE MEDIAN AND CRASHED INTO THE VEHICLE. UPON IMPACT THE DRIVER'S SEAT BELT FAILED TO LOCK AND BOTH FRONTAL AIRBAGS FAILED TO DEPLOY. THE CONSUMER SUSTAINED INJURIES TO THE NECK AND BACK. THERE WAS A FIRE COMING FROM THE ENGINE AREA AFTER IMPACT. THE FIRE DEPARTMENT CUT ALL THE ELECTRICAL WIRES TO EXTINGUISH THE FIRE. ALTHOUGH THE POLICE RESPONDED NO REPORT WERE FILED. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO THE DEALERSHIP WERE IT HAS NOT BEEN INSPECTED. *JB
MADE TURN ON SECONDARY WHILE WAS RAINING, ANOTHER AUTO WAS IN FRONT PASSED AND SLID ON WET ROAD. VEHICLE HIT A UTILITY POLE HEAD ON , AND AIR BAGS DID NOT DEPLOY. AUTO WAS SMASHED BADLY IN FRONT. (MAY BE TOTALED). *AK
WHEN HIT AT 75MPH IN THE FRONT ON DRIVER'S SIDE OF VEHICLE, THE AIR BAG DID NOT DEPLOY. THE DEALER WAS NOTIFIED. *AK *SCC
CONSUMER WAS INVOLVED IN A MAJOR COLLISION WHERE THE VEHICLE FLIPPED APPROXIMATELY 6 TIMES ULTIMATELY CRASHING INTO A WALL. NEITHER THE DRIVER OR PASSENGER AIR BAGS DEPLOYED.*AK *TS
RE: 774560 CONSUMER STRUCK VEHICLE FULL FORCE AND AIR BAGS DID NOT DEPLOY. MR *TS
CONSUMER WAS IN HEAD ON COLLISION AND THE AIR BAGS DIDN'T DEPLOY DURING THE COLLISION. TS
WHILE DRIVING AT A SPEED OF APPROXIMATELY 40 MPH, A LARGE CHEVROLET VAN SHOT ACROSS THE FRONT OF MY VEHICLE FROM A SIDE ROAD. I STRUCK THE OTHER VEHICLE FULL FORCE BUT MY AIR BAGS DID NOT DEPLOY. THIS RESULTED IN ADDITIONAL INJURY TO ME FROM THE SEAT BELT AND SHOULDER STRAP THAT I WAS WEARING. IN ADDITION, MY RIGHT ARM STRUKE SO…
Read full complaint
WHILE DRIVING AT A SPEED OF APPROXIMATELY 40 MPH, A LARGE CHEVROLET VAN SHOT ACROSS THE FRONT OF MY VEHICLE FROM A SIDE ROAD. I STRUCK THE OTHER VEHICLE FULL FORCE BUT MY AIR BAGS DID NOT DEPLOY. THIS RESULTED IN ADDITIONAL INJURY TO ME FROM THE SEAT BELT AND SHOULDER STRAP THAT I WAS WEARING. IN ADDITION, MY RIGHT ARM STRUKE SOMETHING DURING THE CRASH, CAUSING INJURY TO IT. THE RESCUE PEOPLE WERE ALSO VERY CONCERNED ABOUT GETTING ME OUT OF THE VEHICLE (THE DRIVER'S DOOR WAS JAMMED) BEFORE ADDITIONAL INJURIES MIGHT BE CAUSED BY THE AIR BAGS DEPLOYING UNEXPECTEDLY. SHORTLY AFTER TAKING OWNWERSHIP, I HAD REPORTED A VIBRATION PROBLEM WITH THE TRUCK TO CHEVY. CHEVY STATED THAT THIS WAS A KNOWN PROBLEM TO THEM WHICH THEY REFERRED TO AS "FRAME SHAKE" AND REFUSED TO DO ANYTHING TO FIX MY TRUCK. I NOW WONDER IF THE "CONTINUOUS VIBRATION" OF THE TRUCK DID NOT CONTRIBUT TO THE AIR BAGS NOT WORKING. EITHER WAY, THE FAILURE OF THE AIR BAGS COULD HAVE RESULTED IN DEATH INSTEAD OF JUST ADDITIONAL INJURIES. CHEVY NEEDS TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT BOTH PROBLEMS IMMEDIATELY.*AK
Official recalls
100V228003 · Seat Belts
Aug 7, 2000
VEHICLE DESCRIPTION: PASSENGER VEHICLES, LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS, SPORT UTILITY VEHICLES, AND MINI VANS EQUIPPED WITH TRW SEAT BELT BUCKLE ASSEMBLIES. THE BUCKLE BASE OF THESE SEAT BELT ASSEMBLIES WERE NOT PROPERLY HEAT TREATED AND THEREFORE DO NOT PASS THE LOAD BEARING REQUIREMENT OF FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARD NO. 209, "SEAT BELT ASSEMBLIES."
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: IN THE EVENT OF A VEHICLE CRASH, THE OCCUPANT MAY NOT BE PROPERLY RESTRAINED.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL INSPECT THE VEHICLE'S SAFETY BELT BUCKLE ASSEMBLY DATE CODES AND, IF NECESSARY, WILL REPLACE ANY SAFETY BELT BUCKLE ASSEMBLY.
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
3EA05008 · Tailgate Support Cables
Opened Apr 14, 2005 · Closed May 19, 2006
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Latches/locks/linkages:tailgate:latch
GENERAL MOTORS IS CONDUCTING A SPECIAL POLICY PROGRAM FOR 903,464 OWNERS OF 2000 - 2003 MODEL S/T VEHICLES THROUGH WHICH OWNERS MAY, AT THEIR OPTION, EITHER (1) PERIODICALLY INSPECT THE TAILGATE SUPPORT CABLES INSTALLED IN THEIR VEHICLE AND HAVE THE CABLES REPLACED IF THE CABLE COATING EXHIBITS ANY INDICATIONS OF DAMAGE OR DETERIORATION OR (2) REQUEST THAT THE TAILGATE SUPPORT CABLES BE REPLACED FREE OF CHARGE. GM WILL HONOR ALL REQUESTS BY OWNERS WHO OPT FOR REPLACEMENT WITHOUT QUESTION REGARDLESS OF THE CONDITION OR APPEARANCE OF THE CABLES. GM HAS AGREED TO MAIL REMINDER NOTIFICATIONS TO OWNERS EVERY TWO YEARS UNTIL THE TAILGATE SUPPORT CABLES HAVE BEEN REPLACED OR UNTIL THE VEHICLE IS 12 YEARS OLD.ODI'S INVESTIGATION INDICATES THAT A SIGNIFICANT MAJORITY OF THE REPORTED COMPLAINTS (87%) AND INJURIES (94%) HAVE OCCURRED IN MY 2000 - 2003 S/T VEHICLES.
RQ04012 · Tailgate Support Cable(s) Break
Opened Nov 22, 2004 · Closed Apr 14, 2005
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Structure:body:hatchback/liftgate:support Device/strut
ODI IS UPGRADING RQ04-012 AND OPENING AN EA TO INVESTIGATE THE TAILGATE SUPPORT CABLES INSTALLED IN 1998 - 2004 MODEL YEAR SONOMA AND S10 MODEL VEHICLES.GENERAL MOTORS IS CONDUCTING RECALL CAMPAIGN 04V-129 TO REPLACE THE TAILGATE SUPPORT CABLES ORIGINALLY INSTALLED IN CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 2000-2004 SIERRAS AND SILVERADOS AND CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 2002-2004 AVALANCHES AND ESCALADE EXTS (C/K MODELS).GENERAL MOTORS HAS ADVISED ODITHAT THE TAILGATE SUPPORT CABLES INSTALLED IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES WERE FABRICATED USING IDENTICAL OR SIMILAR SHEATHING MATERIAL AS THE RECALLED VEHICLES.HOWEVER,GENERAL MOTORS HAS ADVISED ODI THAT SONOMA AND S-10 VEHICLES DIFFER FROM C/K MODELS IN SEVERAL WAYS: THE VEHICLE HEIGHT IS LOWER; THE TAILGATE DISPLACEMENT (DROP) WHEN NOT SUPPORTED BY THE CABLES IS SMALLER AND THE TAILGATE COMES TO REST AT A LESS SEVERE TIP ANGLE WHEN NOT SUPPORTED BY THE CABLES; THE TAILGATE MASS IS SMALLER; AND THE SIZE, PAYLOAD, AND USAGE CHARACTERISTCIS ARE LESS DEMANDING THAN C/K MODEL VEHICLES.GM ALSO STATED THAT SONOMA AND S-10 WARRANTY CLAIM INFORMATION INDICATES A LOWER CLAIM COUNT AND A LOWER CLAIM RATE THAN RECALLED C/K MODELS.NOTWITHSTANDING THE ABOVE INFORMATION, ODI HAS RECEIVED AN ADDITIONAL 73 NON-INJURY COMPLAINTS AND 10 INJURY COMPLAINTS ON THE SUBJECT VEHICLES DURING RQ04-012 (SINCE NOVEMBER 2004 TO DATE), WHICH JUSTIFIES OPENING AN ENGINEERING ANALYSIS TO FURTHER INVESTIGATE THIS ISSUE.
PE02066 · Engine Stall Due To Fuel Starvation
Opened Sep 6, 2002 · Closed Nov 3, 2003
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Fuel System, Gasoline; Fuel System, Gasoline:delivery:fuel Pump; Fuel System, Other; Fuel System, Other:delivery:fuel Pump
ODI OPENED PE02-066 TO EVALUATE THE SCOPE AND CONSEQUENCE OF ENGINE POWER-LOSS DUE TO FUEL STARVATION INDUCED BY IN-TANK MODULAR FUEL PUMP STRAINER RESTRICTION.THE SUBJECT PUMPS USE AN EXTERNAL ?SOCK? STRAINER TO FILTER FUEL FLOWING TO THE PUMP INLET.THIS FILTER CAN SOMETIMES BECOME CLOGGED, RESULTING IN A REDUCED FLOW OF FUEL TO THE ENGINE.GM HAS SUBSEQUENTLY MODIFIED THE STRAINERS TO REDUCE THIS RESTRICTION.ANALYSIS OF THE ODI COMPLAINT DATABASE SHOWS THAT DESPITE THESE RESTRICTIONS, THE SUBJECT VEHICLES STALL AT A RATE THAT IS COMPARABLE TO THOSE OF MANY PEER VEHICLES.ADDITIONALLY, NONE OF THE RELEVANT WARRANTY REPAIR RATES EXCEED 1% AT 36 MONTHS OF EXPOSURE.ONE RELATED CRASH INVOLVES A STALLED VEHICLE THAT WAS REAR-ENDED ON THE ROADWAY, WHILE THE REMAINDER INVOLVED MINOR COLLISIONS OR SCRAPES.THE SOLE INJURY CONSISTED OF BRUISING FROM A LOW SPEED FRONTAL CRASH. GIVEN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, FURTHER EXPENDITURE OF AGENCY RESOURCES IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN THIS MATTER.THE PRELIMINARY EVALUATION IS THEREFORE CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT NO SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT EXISTS.THE AGENCY WILL TAKE FURTHER ACTION IN THE FUTURE IF WARRANTED.
Additional source detail variants (4)
Fuel System, Gasoline:delivery:fuel Pump
ODI OPENED PE02-066 TO EVALUATE THE SCOPE AND CONSEQUENCE OF ENGINE POWER-LOSS DUE TO FUEL STARVATION INDUCED BY IN-TANK MODULAR FUEL PUMP STRAINER RESTRICTION.THE SUBJECT PUMPS USE AN EXTERNAL ?SOCK? STRAINER TO FILTER FUEL FLOWING TO THE PUMP INLET.THIS FILTER CAN SOMETIMES BECOME CLOGGED, RESULTING IN A REDUCED FLOW OF FUEL TO THE ENGINE.GM HAS SUBSEQUENTLY MODIFIED THE STRAINERS TO REDUCE THIS RESTRICTION.ANALYSIS OF THE ODI COMPLAINT DATABASE SHOWS THAT DESPITE THESE RESTRICTIONS, THE SUBJECT VEHICLES STALL AT A RATE THAT IS COMPARABLE TO THOSE OF MANY PEER VEHICLES.ADDITIONALLY, NONE OF THE RELEVANT WARRANTY REPAIR RATES EXCEED 1% AT 36 MONTHS OF EXPOSURE.ONE RELATED CRASH INVOLVES A STALLED VEHICLE THAT WAS REAR-ENDED ON THE ROADWAY, WHILE THE REMAINDER INVOLVED MINOR COLLISIONS OR SCRAPES.THE SOLE INJURY CONSISTED OF BRUISING FROM A LOW SPEED FRONTAL CRASH. GIVEN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, FURTHER EXPENDITURE OF AGENCY RESOURCES IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN THIS MATTER.THE PRELIMINARY EVALUATION IS THEREFORE CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT NO SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT EXISTS.THE AGENCY WILL TAKE FURTHER ACTION IN THE FUTURE IF WARRANTED.
Fuel System, Gasoline
ODI OPENED PE02-066 TO EVALUATE THE SCOPE AND CONSEQUENCE OF ENGINE POWER-LOSS DUE TO FUEL STARVATION INDUCED BY IN-TANK MODULAR FUEL PUMP STRAINER RESTRICTION.THE SUBJECT PUMPS USE AN EXTERNAL ?SOCK? STRAINER TO FILTER FUEL FLOWING TO THE PUMP INLET.THIS FILTER CAN SOMETIMES BECOME CLOGGED, RESULTING IN A REDUCED FLOW OF FUEL TO THE ENGINE.GM HAS SUBSEQUENTLY MODIFIED THE STRAINERS TO REDUCE THIS RESTRICTION.ANALYSIS OF THE ODI COMPLAINT DATABASE SHOWS THAT DESPITE THESE RESTRICTIONS, THE SUBJECT VEHICLES STALL AT A RATE THAT IS COMPARABLE TO THOSE OF MANY PEER VEHICLES.ADDITIONALLY, NONE OF THE RELEVANT WARRANTY REPAIR RATES EXCEED 1% AT 36 MONTHS OF EXPOSURE.ONE RELATED CRASH INVOLVES A STALLED VEHICLE THAT WAS REAR-ENDED ON THE ROADWAY, WHILE THE REMAINDER INVOLVED MINOR COLLISIONS OR SCRAPES.THE SOLE INJURY CONSISTED OF BRUISING FROM A LOW SPEED FRONTAL CRASH. GIVEN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, FURTHER EXPENDITURE OF AGENCY RESOURCES IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN THIS MATTER.THE PRELIMINARY EVALUATION IS THEREFORE CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT NO SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT EXISTS.THE AGENCY WILL TAKE FURTHER ACTION IN THE FUTURE IF WARRANTED.
Fuel System, Other:delivery:fuel Pump
ODI OPENED PE02-066 TO EVALUATE THE SCOPE AND CONSEQUENCE OF ENGINE POWER-LOSS DUE TO FUEL STARVATION INDUCED BY IN-TANK MODULAR FUEL PUMP STRAINER RESTRICTION.THE SUBJECT PUMPS USE AN EXTERNAL ?SOCK? STRAINER TO FILTER FUEL FLOWING TO THE PUMP INLET.THIS FILTER CAN SOMETIMES BECOME CLOGGED, RESULTING IN A REDUCED FLOW OF FUEL TO THE ENGINE.GM HAS SUBSEQUENTLY MODIFIED THE STRAINERS TO REDUCE THIS RESTRICTION.ANALYSIS OF THE ODI COMPLAINT DATABASE SHOWS THAT DESPITE THESE RESTRICTIONS, THE SUBJECT VEHICLES STALL AT A RATE THAT IS COMPARABLE TO THOSE OF MANY PEER VEHICLES.ADDITIONALLY, NONE OF THE RELEVANT WARRANTY REPAIR RATES EXCEED 1% AT 36 MONTHS OF EXPOSURE.ONE RELATED CRASH INVOLVES A STALLED VEHICLE THAT WAS REAR-ENDED ON THE ROADWAY, WHILE THE REMAINDER INVOLVED MINOR COLLISIONS OR SCRAPES.THE SOLE INJURY CONSISTED OF BRUISING FROM A LOW SPEED FRONTAL CRASH. GIVEN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, FURTHER EXPENDITURE OF AGENCY RESOURCES IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN THIS MATTER.THE PRELIMINARY EVALUATION IS THEREFORE CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT NO SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT EXISTS.THE AGENCY WILL TAKE FURTHER ACTION IN THE FUTURE IF WARRANTED.
Fuel System, Other
ODI OPENED PE02-066 TO EVALUATE THE SCOPE AND CONSEQUENCE OF ENGINE POWER-LOSS DUE TO FUEL STARVATION INDUCED BY IN-TANK MODULAR FUEL PUMP STRAINER RESTRICTION.THE SUBJECT PUMPS USE AN EXTERNAL ?SOCK? STRAINER TO FILTER FUEL FLOWING TO THE PUMP INLET.THIS FILTER CAN SOMETIMES BECOME CLOGGED, RESULTING IN A REDUCED FLOW OF FUEL TO THE ENGINE.GM HAS SUBSEQUENTLY MODIFIED THE STRAINERS TO REDUCE THIS RESTRICTION.ANALYSIS OF THE ODI COMPLAINT DATABASE SHOWS THAT DESPITE THESE RESTRICTIONS, THE SUBJECT VEHICLES STALL AT A RATE THAT IS COMPARABLE TO THOSE OF MANY PEER VEHICLES.ADDITIONALLY, NONE OF THE RELEVANT WARRANTY REPAIR RATES EXCEED 1% AT 36 MONTHS OF EXPOSURE.ONE RELATED CRASH INVOLVES A STALLED VEHICLE THAT WAS REAR-ENDED ON THE ROADWAY, WHILE THE REMAINDER INVOLVED MINOR COLLISIONS OR SCRAPES.THE SOLE INJURY CONSISTED OF BRUISING FROM A LOW SPEED FRONTAL CRASH. GIVEN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, FURTHER EXPENDITURE OF AGENCY RESOURCES IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN THIS MATTER.THE PRELIMINARY EVALUATION IS THEREFORE CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT NO SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT EXISTS.THE AGENCY WILL TAKE FURTHER ACTION IN THE FUTURE IF WARRANTED.