IllustrationPE90015 · Driveline Lockup
Opened Nov 6, 1989 · Closed Mar 29, 1990
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Parking Brake
There is no summary currently available
1986 GMC School Bus Series
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 School Bus Series years →Counts vary with age, sales and reporting. They are not failure rates.
What owners reported most
No component reports in this snapshot.
Tap a category to read its complaints. One report may name several components.
When problems were reported
Mileage at the reported incident
Limited mileage data: 0 of 0 reports include usable mileage. There isn’t enough coverage to show a useful chart.
NHTSA’s mileage field refers to the reported incident, not necessarily the filing date. This shows report counts, not the likelihood of a failure.
NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
0 crash reports0 fire reports0 injury reports
What owners actually said
0 reportsNo matching complaints in this snapshot.
Official recalls
0No recalls in this snapshot.
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
2PE87014 · Engine Fires
Opened Jan 9, 1987 · Closed Jul 14, 1987
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Vehicle Speed Control:linkages
SUMMARY OF INFORMATION FROM MANUFACTURER:GM ALLEGES THAT IN ONE INCIDENTA BUS BUILDER IMPROPERLY MOUNTED THE COOLANT RECOVERY BOTTLE, RESULTINGIN ETHYLENE GLYCOL COMING INTO CONTACT WITH AN EXHAUST MANIFOLD ANDIGNITING.THE BUS BODY BUILDER DENIES THE ALLEGATION.IN ADDITION GMIDENTIFIED TWO CHANGES WHICH MAY RELATE TO THE SUBJECT.BEGINNING IN MAY,1983 THE POSITIVE BATTERY CABLE ON G MODELS WAS RE-ROUTED AND ADDITIONALPROTECTION INSTALLED.ALSO EFFECTIVE FEBRUARY, 1985 THE ANTI-DIESELINGWIRE WAS SECURED TO INSURE THAT IT WOULD NOT COME IN CONTACT WITH A GROUND.ANALYSIS:ANALYSIS INDICATES THAT THE ENGINE FIRES CAN BE ATTRIBUTED TO AVARIETY OF POSSIBLE CAUSES, AMONG THEM BEING A LACK OF, OR IMPROPERMAINTENANCE, GROUNDING OF A HOT WIRE, COOLANT CONTACT WITH THE EXHAUSTSYSTEM, AND POSSIBLE FUEL LEAKS.IN ADDITION TO GM, EIGHT BUS BODYBUILDERS WERE CONTACTED FOR INPUT ON THE PROBLEM.OF THE EIGHT, THREEREPORTED FIRES INVOLVING SIX BUSSES OVER A SIX YEAR PERIOD.AVAILABLEDATA FOR ALL SIX FIRES HAS BEEN REVIEWED FOR ANY POSSIBLE PATTERN OFFAULT OR DEFECT.THREE OF THE REPORTS DID NOT INCLUDE ANY PROBABLE CAUSEOTHER THAN ENGINE FIRE OF UNSPECIFIED ORIGIN.THIS IS PROBABLY A RESULT OFTHE DIFFICULTY IN IDENTIFYING A FAULT AFTER THE FIRE HAS CONSUMED MANY OFTHE INVOLVED COMPONENTS.IN THE OTHER THREE INCIDENTS, DIFFERENT PROBLEMSWERE ALLEGED TO HAVE CAUSED THE FIRES, WITH NO COMMON CAUSE NOTED.INFIVE OF THE SIX INCIDENTS, MENTALLY AND/OR PHYSICALLY HANDICAPPEDCHILDREN WERE ON THE BUS AT THE TIME OF THE INCIDENT.IN EVERY INCIDENTEVERYONE WAS EVACUATED SAFELY WITH NO REPORTED INJURIES.GENERALLY SOMETYPE OF WARNING WAS GIVEN IN THAT THE DRIVER WOULD SMELL SOMETHING BURNINGOR DETECT SMOKE.PROPOSED ACTION:CLOSE THIS PE.THE AVAILABLE MATERIAL INDICATES THAT THEENGINE FIRES CAN BE ATTRIBUTED TO A VARIETY OF POSSIBLE CAUSES.THERE ISNO APPARENT COMMON PATTERN OF DEFECT AT THIS TIME.CONTINUE TO MONITOR THESCHOOL BUS INDUSTRY FOR FUTURE INCIDENTS.===