IllustrationSNAPPING AND POPPING FROM FRONT AND REAR SUSPENSION. TOOK TO DEALER AND THEY REPLACED THE STABALIZER LINKS. THIS SEEMD TO TAKE CARE OF THE PROBLEM FOR A WHILE. NOW THE NOISE IS BACK AND AT TIMES IS QUITE LOUD. VEHICLE HAS 21,000 MILES. *JB
2004 Chevrolet Trailblazer
Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations
More warning signs than most Trailblazer years
Owner complaints for the 2004 Chevrolet Trailblazer are substantially higher than the model-year median of 87.5.
About this comparison →How this year compares
Owner complaints by model year
Compare all Trailblazer 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
880–25K
16325–50K
27450–75K
17675–100K
137100–150K
61150K+
899 reports with mileage · 182 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 627 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Exterior Lighting. Review the 101 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Fuel System, Gasoline. Review the 93 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
56 crash reports31 fire reports47 injury reports
What owners actually said
1,081 reportsTL*- THE CONTACT STATED THAT HE TOOK THE VEHICLE TO A DEALERSHIP FOR AN INSPECTION ON 1/9/07. HE WAS INFORMED BY THE MECHANIC THAT THE VEHICLE WILL NOT PASS INSPECTION NEXT YEAR BECAUSE OF THE BRAKE ROTORS. THE SERVICE DEPARTMENT INDICATED THAT ALL 4 ROTORS WERE WARPED. THE CONTACT BELIEVED THAT THE ROTORS SHOULD NOT B…
Read full complaint
TL*- THE CONTACT STATED THAT HE TOOK THE VEHICLE TO A DEALERSHIP FOR AN INSPECTION ON 1/9/07. HE WAS INFORMED BY THE MECHANIC THAT THE VEHICLE WILL NOT PASS INSPECTION NEXT YEAR BECAUSE OF THE BRAKE ROTORS. THE SERVICE DEPARTMENT INDICATED THAT ALL 4 ROTORS WERE WARPED. THE CONTACT BELIEVED THAT THE ROTORS SHOULD NOT BE IN NEED OF REPLACEMENT AT 21800 MILES. *AK UPDATED 01/31/07. *JB
TL* - THE CONTACT OWNS A 2005 CHEVROLET TRAIL BLAZER. DURING A SNOW STORM THE CONTACT'S VEHICLE WAS INVOLVED IN A HEAD ON COLLISION. THE CONTACT WAS DRIVING ON THE HIGHWAY AT 55 MPH, AND THE AIR BAGS DID NOT DEPLOY. THERE WERE NO WARNING INDICATOR LIGHTS. THE MANUFACTURER SENT AN INVESTIGATOR TO ACCESS THE DAMAGE, AND …
Read full complaint
TL* - THE CONTACT OWNS A 2005 CHEVROLET TRAIL BLAZER. DURING A SNOW STORM THE CONTACT'S VEHICLE WAS INVOLVED IN A HEAD ON COLLISION. THE CONTACT WAS DRIVING ON THE HIGHWAY AT 55 MPH, AND THE AIR BAGS DID NOT DEPLOY. THERE WERE NO WARNING INDICATOR LIGHTS. THE MANUFACTURER SENT AN INVESTIGATOR TO ACCESS THE DAMAGE, AND STATED THAT THERE WAS $10,000 WORTH OF DAMAGE, AND THAT THE VEHICLE WAS ONLY TRAVELING 8 MPH. *AK
MY 2004 TRAILBLAZER SPARE TIRE WINCH WOULD NOT CRANK MY TIRE ALL THE WAY DOWN I WAS ON THE SIDE OF THE EXPRESSWAY AND COULD NOT REMOVE MY TIRE SO THAT I COULD CHANGE IT. *NM
TL* - THE CONTACT HAS A 2004 CHEVROLET TRAILBLAZER WITH 17000 MILES ON THE ODOMETER, THE LIFTGATE DOES NOT LATCH. THE CONTACT STATED THAT IT FIRST HAPPENED ON 12-23-06 AND IT HAS NOT WORKED SINCE. THE CONTACT SAID THAT SHE HAS TRIED THE POWER LOCK, AND THE KEY FOB/REMOTE AND IT STILL DID NOT LOCK. *AK
ON 8/1/06 I WAS AWAKEN BY A NEIGHBOR AT 1 AM SAYING MY CAR WAS ON FIRE. THE FIRE DEPARTMENT WAS CALLED BUT THE ENTIRE INTERIOR WAS DESTROYED. THE FIRE DEPARTMENT SAID IT HAD TO HAVE BEEN AN ELECTRICAL MALFUNCTION. THE VEHICLE HAD BEEN PARKED SINCE 8 PM THAT NIGHT AND IT WAS LOCKED. THERE WAS NO SIGN OF FORCED ENTRY AND NO SIGN O…
Read full complaint
ON 8/1/06 I WAS AWAKEN BY A NEIGHBOR AT 1 AM SAYING MY CAR WAS ON FIRE. THE FIRE DEPARTMENT WAS CALLED BUT THE ENTIRE INTERIOR WAS DESTROYED. THE FIRE DEPARTMENT SAID IT HAD TO HAVE BEEN AN ELECTRICAL MALFUNCTION. THE VEHICLE HAD BEEN PARKED SINCE 8 PM THAT NIGHT AND IT WAS LOCKED. THERE WAS NO SIGN OF FORCED ENTRY AND NO SIGN OF ANY OTHER REASON FOR THE FIRE. THE CAR WAS PURCHASED NEW IN 10/04 AND HAD LESS THAN 30,000 MILES ON IT. I USED THE ROADSIDE WARRANTY TO HAVE IT TOWED TO A DEALER BUT THE DEALER REFUSED TO HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH IT. IT TOOK TWO WEEKS FOR GM TO SEND A FIRE INVESTIGATOR OUT AND THEIR INVESTIGATOR SAID HE COULDN'T DETERMINE THE CAUSE OF THE FIRE. I FILED A COMPLAINT WITH THE VERMONT STATE ATTORNEY'S OFFICE BUT GM DID NOT RESPOND TO THE COMPLAINT. I HAD ELECTRICAL REPAIRS DONE JUST A FEW MONTHS AFTER PURCHASING THE VEHICLE TOO AND THE STEREO SYSTEM HAD STOPPED WORKING JUST A MONTH BEFORE THE FIRE. THE CAR IS STILL SITTING AT THE DEALERSHIP. I DID NOT HAVE COLLISION INSURANCE BECAUSE THE CAR WAS PAID IN FULL AND MY CURRENT FINANCES DID NOT ALLOW ME TO MAINTAIN ANYTHING MORE THAN LIABILITY INSURANCE. SO NOW I HAVE NO VEHICLE AND THIS IS TOUGH WITH 3 YOUNG CHILDREN. GM REFUSES TO HONOR THEIR WARRANTY AND INSISTS THAT THIS MODEL VEHICLE DOESN'T HAVE ELECTRICAL ISSUES. IT'S TIME SOMEONE MADE GM HONOR THE WARRANTY THEY CHARGE FOR WHEN YOU PURCHASE A NEW VEHICLE. *JB
THE SPEEDOMETER & TACH DO NOT WORK PROPERLY THEY READ WRONG OR NOT AT ALL. YOU CAN BE DRIVING AT 50 MPH YOU THINK, BUT IT MIGHT BE 60 OR 70. WHEN I CALLED THE DEALER SERVICE THE REP SEAMED TO KNOW RIGHT AWAY WHAT THE PROBLEM WAS. COST $400.00+ TO FIX. *NM
DT*: THE CONTACT STATED WHILE DRIVING UNDER NORMAL ROAD CONDITIONS, THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED BY ITSELF FROM 25 TO 30 MPH. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT TAKEN TO THE SERVICE DEALER.*AK UPDATED 01/19/07.*JB
WHILE I'M DRIVING THE CAR WILL JUST TURN OFF. I CAN BE AT A LIGHT, TURNING, MERGING ONTO TRAFFIC OR JUST SITTING IN TRAFFIC. I'VE BEEN ABLE TO AVOID THREE ACCIDENT TO DATE. I DID BRING THE CAR IN TO THE DEALER - THEY FIXED IT. UNTIL IT HAPPENED THREE DAYS LATER. IT HAPPENS 6 OUT OF THE 7 DAYS A WEEK. *JB
2004 CHEVROLET TRAILBLAZER. THE VEHICLE'S A/C AIR OUTPUT WORKS FINE, BUT WHEN YOU SWITCH IT TO HEAT, THE OUTPUT FOR THIS IS DIMINISHED CONSIDERABLY. THE VEHICLE HEATS UP FINE, BUT EVEN WHEN THE AIRFLOW IS ENTIRELY AT THE DASH (NONE DIRECTED TO THE FLOORBOARD) THE OUTPUT OF AIR FOR THE HEAT IS VERY LOW; SO LOW IT CAN'T EVEN BE …
Read full complaint
2004 CHEVROLET TRAILBLAZER. THE VEHICLE'S A/C AIR OUTPUT WORKS FINE, BUT WHEN YOU SWITCH IT TO HEAT, THE OUTPUT FOR THIS IS DIMINISHED CONSIDERABLY. THE VEHICLE HEATS UP FINE, BUT EVEN WHEN THE AIRFLOW IS ENTIRELY AT THE DASH (NONE DIRECTED TO THE FLOORBOARD) THE OUTPUT OF AIR FOR THE HEAT IS VERY LOW; SO LOW IT CAN'T EVEN BE FELT UNLESS THE HAND IS PLACED DIRECTLY IN FRONT OF THE VENT NO MATTER HOW HIGH THE SETTING IS. VEH HAS BEEN TAKEN BACK TO THE DEALER (UNDER WARRANTY), AND WAS TOLD NO DIAGNOSTIC PROBLEM WAS DETECTED; EVERYTHING IS WORKING PROPERLY. COMPARED MY VEHICLE TO OTHERS OF SIMILAR MAKE/MODEL/YEAR, AND DEALER SAYS ALL WORK THE SAME. THIS IS NOT TRUE BECAUSE LAST YEAR, I COULD NOT STAND THE HEAT ON SETTING OF MORE THAN TWO BECAUSE THE OUTPUT WAS VERY GOOD. NOW, IT CAN BE PUT AT A HIGHER SETTING, BUT WITH LITTLE HEAT OUTPUT. I COMMUNICATED WITH AN INTERNET SERVICE TECHNICIAN WHO SAYS IT IS THE AIR FLOW DOOR THAT IS NOT SEALING PROPERLY. THE INTERNET SERVICE TECHNICIAN ALSO SAID IT IS DIFFICULT/TEDIOUS TO FIX THIS PROBLEM. I THINK THE DEALER JUST DOESN'T WANT TO MESS WITH IT AS IT IS UNDER WARRANTY. *NM
Official recalls
205V198000 · Exterior Lighting:turn Signal
May 5, 2005
ON CERTAIN TRUCKS AND SPORT UTILITY VEHICLES, THE DRIVER WISHING TO SIGNAL A TURN BY MOVING THE DIRECTIONAL SIGNAL LEVER, (UP OR DOWN) MAY CAUSE THE FRONT MARKER/TURN LIGHTS AND REAR TURN LIGHTS TO FLASH IN A MANNER SIMILAR TO HAZARD WARNING, RATHER THAN FLASHING ON THE DESIRED SIDE ONLY.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: THE DRIVER MAY NOT BE ABLE TO CLEARLY SIGNAL THEIR INTENTIONS TO TURN, CHANGE TRAVEL LANES, OR POTENTIALLY WARN OTHERS OF AN IMPAIRED VEHICLE OPERATING CONDITION INCREASING THE RISK OF A CRASH.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL REPLACE THE SUSPECT FLASHER MODULES WITH A NEW FLASHER MODULE DESIGNED WITH SEALED RELAYS AND MORE DURABLE CONTACT MATERIAL INSIDE OF THE RELAYS FREE OF CHARGE. THE RECALL BEGAN ON AUGUST 4, 2005. ISUZU BEGAN MAILING OWNER LETTERS ON AUGUST 4, 2005. OWNERS MAY CONTACT CHEVROLET AT 1-800-630-2438, GMC AT 1-866-996-9463, ISUZU AT 1-800-255-6727, BUICK AT 1-866-608-8080, AND OLDSMOBILE AT 1-800-630-6537.
04V527000 · Exterior Lighting:brake Lights
Nov 1, 2004
ON CERTAIN SPORT UTILITY VEHICLES, VIBRATION AND HEAT MAY CAUSE THE TAIL LAMP/STOP LAMP BULB TO LOOSEN IN ITS SOCKET. IF THIS OCCURS, THE BULB MAY FLICKER AND EVENTUALLY BECOME INOPERATIVE.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: AN INOPERATIVE BRAKE LAMP WILL NOT CONVEY THE DRIVER'S INTENTION OF STOPPING TO DRIVERS IN FOLLOWING VEHICLES, AND AN INOPERATIVE REAR TURN SIGNAL LAMP WILL NOT CONVEY THE DRIVER'S INTENTION TO TURN TO DRIVERS IN FOLLOWING VEHICLES. BOTH OF THESE FAILURES CAN INCREASE THE RISK OF A CRASH.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL INSPECT THE TAIL LAMP/STOP LAMP ASSEMBLIES, AND IF NECESSARY, REPLACE THEM. THE RECALL BEGAN ON NOVEMBER 22, 2004. OWNERS SHOULD CONTACT CHEVROLET AT 1-800-630-2438, OLDSMOBILE AT 1-800-630-6537, BUICK AT 1-866-608-8080, OR GMC AT 1-866-996-9463.
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
4RQ17002 · Loss Of Headlights
Opened Apr 24, 2017 · Closed Mar 29, 2021
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Exterior Lighting:headlights
The subject vehicles are model year (MY) 2002-2009 Chevrolet Trailblazer, GMC Envoy, 2004-2007 Buick Rainier, 2003-2008 Isuzu Ascender, 2005-2009 Saab 9-7X, 2002-2004 Oldsmobile Bravada, 2003-2006 Chevrolet SSR, 2005-2009 Buick Lacrosse, and 2006-2008 Pontiac Grand Prix. This scope includes the Trailblazer/Envoy variants: 2002-2006 Envoy XL/Trailblazer EXT and 2004-2005 Envoy XUV. The original scope of this investigation was expanded to include all vehicles equipped with the subject Headlight Driver Module (HDM). The focus of the investigation was to determine whether actions performed by General Motors adequately addressed any unreasonable risk to motor vehicle safety in the subject vehicles concerning the headlights and the HDM that controls them.Under normal electrical load and environmental conditions, the HDM can overheat inside the Underhood Electrical Center (UEC). This can cause the module to fail and result in a simultaneous loss of both low beam headlights and both daytime running lights (DRLs), often with no warning or prior detectability to the driver. This failure can be intermittent or permanent. No other exterior lights are affected. High beams, turn signals, brake lights, and reverse lights are still operational.General Motors addressed this issue with 2 recalls (14V755 & 15V519) and a special coverage program (N172091910). In view of the recalls and special coverage program implemented by GM and the vehicle high beams continuing to operate, ODI has tentatively concluded that the actions taken by GM mitigate any unreasonable risk to safety posed by HDM failure in the subject vehicles.Accordingly, the investigation is closed. The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist. The agency reserves the right to take additional action if warranted by new circumstances.The ODI reports cited above are available for review online at NHTSA.gov under the identification numbers in the attached document.
EA07009 · Fuel Pump Module Leaks Gasoline
Opened Jul 10, 2007 · Closed Aug 28, 2008
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Fuel System, Gasoline:delivery:fuel Pump
DURING THE COURSE OF THIS EA INVESTIGATION, ODI OBSERVED THAT THE MAJORITY OF THE COMPLAINTS (88%) AND WARRANTY CLAIMS (94%) WERE REPORTED FOR VEHICLES THAT ARE REGISTERED FOR USE IN THE SALT BELT REGION OF THE US.THIS AREA INCLUDES 20 STATES IN THE NORTHEAST, MID ATLANTIC AND THE MIDWEST REGIONS AND THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA.CONSUMERS IN THE SALT BELT REGION REPORTED TO ODI THAT THEY COULD SMELL FUEL VAPORS IN THEIR VEHICLES WHILE DRIVING.UPON FURTHER EXAMINATION OF THEIR VEHICLES, THEY DISCOVERED THAT FUEL VAPORS WERE COMING OUT OF THE TOP OF THE FUEL TANK. THIS CONDITION IS CAUSED BY CORROSION OF THE RETURN AND SENDER LINES OF THE FUEL PUMP MODULE.WATER AND ROAD SALT COLLECT ON TOP OF THE FUEL PUMP LEADING TO SMALL PINHOLES APPEARING ON THE FUEL LINES.FUEL MAY LEAK AND COLLECT ON TOP OF THE MODULE AND/OR SPILL ONTO THE GROUND.THE DATA EVALUATED UNDER THIS INVESTIGATION REFLECT A RELATIVELY LOW FREQUENCY OF OCCURRENCE THAT LARGELY ARISES IN SALT BELT STATES.GM HAS EXTENDED THE WARRANTY ON THE SUBJECT COMPONENT TO TEN YEARS OR 120,000 MILES.FURTHER USE OF AGENCY RESOURCES DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE WARRANTED AT THIS TIME; ACCORDINGLY, THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT NO SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT EXISTS.THE AGENCY RESERVES THE RIGHT TO TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES.FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION SELECT DOCUMENT SEARCH.
EA04021 · Brake Lamp Failure
Opened Aug 3, 2004 · Closed Nov 4, 2004
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Exterior Lighting:brake Lights
GM STATES THAT SOME BRAKE/TAIL LAMP BULBS CAN PREMATURELY BECOME INOPERATIVE DUE TO MALFUNCTIONING BRAKE/TAIL LAMP SOCKETS.ON MARCH 2, 2004, GM INITIATED A 6-YEAR/72,000 MILE SPECIAL POLICY FOR 989,487 SUBJECT VEHICLES TO INSPECT AND REPLACE THE REAR BRAKE/TAIL LAMP BULB SOCKET ASSEMBLIES.ON APRIL 4, 2004, THE OFFICE OF DEFECTS INVESTIGATION (ODI) OPENED A PRELIMINARY EVALUATION (PE04-032) BASED ON CONSUMER COMPLAINTS ALLEGING BRAKE LIGHTS NOT OPERATING WHEN THE BRAKE PEDAL IS DEPRESSED.ON AUGUST 3, 2004 ODI UPGRADED PE04-032 TO AN ENGINEERING ANALYSIS (EA04-021).BY LETTER DATED OCTOBER 27, 2004 GM NOTIFIED NHTSA THAT IT WILL CONDUCT A SAFETY RECALL (NHTSA # 04V527) COVERING SUBJECT VEHICLES THAT WERE NOT ALREADY REPAIRED UNDER GM'S SPECIAL POLICY.MY 2004 SUBJECT VEHICLES BUILT AFTER AUGUST 8, 2003 CONTAIN IMPROVED BRAKE LAMP ASSEMBLIES AND ARE NOT INCLUDED IN THE RECALL.GM DEALERS WILL INSTALL THE IMPROVED BRAKE LAMP ASSEMBLY ON SUBJECT VEHICLES BUILT ON AUGUST 8, 2003 AND EARLIER.THE ACTION TAKEN BY GM IS SUFFICIENT TO RESOLVE THE ISSUES RAISED BY THIS INVESTIGATION.ACCORDINGLY, THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED.
PE04032 · Brake Lamp Failure
Opened Apr 6, 2004 · Closed Aug 3, 2004
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Exterior Lighting:brake Lights
THE OFFICE OF DEFECTS INVESTIGATION (ODI) OPENED THIS INVESTIGATION ON MODEL YEAR (MY) 2002-04 CHEVROLET TRAILBLAZER VEHICLES.GM REPORTS THAT OTHER VEHICLES SHARING THIS PLATFORM AND BRAKE LAMP DESIGN ARE THE MY 2002-2004 CHEVROLET TRAILBLAZER EXT; GMC ENVOY, XL, XUV; OLDSMOBILE BRAVADA AND 2004 BUICK RAINIER.COMPLAINTS ALLEGE THAT THE REAR BRAKE LAMP DOES NOT OPERATE WHEN THE BRAKE PEDAL IS DEPRESSED.THERE IS NO INDICATION TO THE DRIVER FROM INSIDE THE VEHICLE THAT ONE OR MORE BRAKE LAMPS BULBS ARE NOT FUNCTIONING.GM FOUND THAT HEAT FROM THE BULB COULD DEFORM THE LAMP SOCKET, PRODUCE ELECTRICAL ARCING AND AN INOPERATIVE BULB.TO CORRECT THE CONDITION, GM CHANGED THE BULB TO A BULB THAT TRANSMITS LESS HEAT TO THE SOCKET AND CHANGED THE SOCKET TO A THERMOPLASTIC POLYMER TO IMPROVE THERMAL STABILITY.THESE CHANGES WERE IMPLEMENTED INTO PRODUCTION VEHICLES ON OCTOBER 1, 2003.GM IMPLEMENTED A SPECIAL POLICY BY NOTIFYING CONSUMERS THAT IF THEY SHOULD EXPERIENCE A BRAKE LAMP FAILURE TO GO TO THEIR GM DEALERSHIP TO HAVE THE CIRCUIT BOARD CONTAINING THE BRAKE LAMP REPLACED ALONG WITH NEW BULBS.THIS POLICY IS GOOD FOR THE FIRST 6 YEARS OR 72,000 MILES OF THE LIFE OF THE VEHICLE.ODI WILL UPGRADE THIS INVESTIGATION TO EA 04-021 AND INCLUDE THE ABOVE MENTIONED VEHICLES.