← New search

2004 Pontiac Gto

Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations

Similar to other model years

Owner complaints for the 2004 Pontiac Gto do not stand out strongly from the model-year median of 154.

About this comparison →

How this year compares

Owner complaints by model year

Other model years Selected year
Compare all Gto 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

190 reports with mileage · 55 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.

  • Suspension. Review the 169 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Tires. Review the 65 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Power Train. Review the 17 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →

NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.

7 crash reports1 fire reports6 injury reports

Tires complaints

65 reports
Clear category filter
Mileage unknown · Mar 12, 2007
SuspensionTires

STRUT TOWER RUBBING ON TIRES CAUSING DANGEROUS AMOUNT OF WEAR. THE TIRES ON MY 2004 PONTIAC GTO SHOW SEVERE WEAR ON THE INSIDE CORNER EDGES, EXCESSIVE WEAR AND CUPPING ARE PROMINENT. TIRES HAVE UNDER 30,000 HIGHWAY MILES, NORMAL COMMUTE DRIVING (THIS IS MY DAILY DRIVER NOT A RACE CAR). EVEN WITH REGULAR ROTATION, THE TIRES ARE S…

Read full complaint

STRUT TOWER RUBBING ON TIRES CAUSING DANGEROUS AMOUNT OF WEAR. THE TIRES ON MY 2004 PONTIAC GTO SHOW SEVERE WEAR ON THE INSIDE CORNER EDGES, EXCESSIVE WEAR AND CUPPING ARE PROMINENT. TIRES HAVE UNDER 30,000 HIGHWAY MILES, NORMAL COMMUTE DRIVING (THIS IS MY DAILY DRIVER NOT A RACE CAR). EVEN WITH REGULAR ROTATION, THE TIRES ARE SO BADLY WORN THAT THE BELTS ARE ALMOST EXPOSED. I BELIEVE THIS MAY BE DUE TO THE 2004 GTO PROBLEM OF STRUT TOWER RUBBING. CONTACT WITH THE STRUT TOWER IS VISIBLY EVIDENT ON THE STRUT. I MENTIONED THIS TO MY GM DEALER WHO PERFORMED SERVICE ON MY VEHICLE AND THEY WERE UNAWARE OF ANY KNOWN ISSUES WITH THE GTO. *JB

NHTSA ODI #10184821

Mileage unknown · Mar 6, 2007
SuspensionTires

WE HAVE A 2004 GTO WITH 18,000 MILES ON IT. 2 WEEKS AGO I WAS DRIVING ON THE INTERSTATE AND I HEARD A LOUD BANGING NOISE COMING FROM THE PASSENGER SIDE OF THE CAR. MY HUSBAND NOTICED THAT THERE WAS A 8 INCH BY 2 INCH PIECE OF RUBBER THAT HAD PEALED OFF OF THE INSIDE OF THE TIRE AND WAS RUBBING AGAINST SOMETHING MAKING THE NOIS…

Read full complaint

WE HAVE A 2004 GTO WITH 18,000 MILES ON IT. 2 WEEKS AGO I WAS DRIVING ON THE INTERSTATE AND I HEARD A LOUD BANGING NOISE COMING FROM THE PASSENGER SIDE OF THE CAR. MY HUSBAND NOTICED THAT THERE WAS A 8 INCH BY 2 INCH PIECE OF RUBBER THAT HAD PEALED OFF OF THE INSIDE OF THE TIRE AND WAS RUBBING AGAINST SOMETHING MAKING THE NOISE. 1 WEEK LATER ANOTHER PIECE ON THE SAME TIRE HAD PEELED LOOSE AND WAS KNOCKING UP AGAINST THE WHEEL WELL OF THE CAR. I TOOK THE CAR TO CLASSIC PONTIAC AND THEY TOLD ME TO LEAVE THE CAR OVER NIGHT SO THAT THEY COULD GET A BETTER LOOK AT IT AND THAT IT WAS TOO DANGEROUS TO DRIVE. I WAS THEN TOLD BY A CO-WORKER THAT SHE SAW SOMETHING ON CHANNEL 5 NEWS THAT GTO'S WERE HAVING A PROBLEM WITH THE TIRES RUBBING UP AGAINST THE SHOCKS. I DID NOT RECEIVE ANYTHING IN THE MAIL FOR A RE-CALL ON MY CAR. I WILL LET YOU KNOW WHAT CLASSIC PONTIAC DOES TO REPAIR MY CAR. *JB

NHTSA ODI #10184381

16,808 miles · Feb 22, 2007
SeatsSuspensionTires

TL* - THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 PONTIAC GTO. THE FRONT 17 INCH PASSENGER AND DRIVER TIRES RUBBED AGAINST THE STRUTS AND CAUSED THE TIRES TO WEAR OUT PREMATURELY. THE STEERING WHEEL VIBRATED WHILE DRIVING BUT IT NO LONGER OCCURRED AFTER THE ALIGNMENT. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 16,808. THE CONTACT READ ON THE INTERNET RELATED …

Read full complaint

TL* - THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 PONTIAC GTO. THE FRONT 17 INCH PASSENGER AND DRIVER TIRES RUBBED AGAINST THE STRUTS AND CAUSED THE TIRES TO WEAR OUT PREMATURELY. THE STEERING WHEEL VIBRATED WHILE DRIVING BUT IT NO LONGER OCCURRED AFTER THE ALIGNMENT. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 16,808. THE CONTACT READ ON THE INTERNET RELATED COMPLAINTS, AND WAS AWARE OF THE NHTSA INVESTIGATION. ALSO, HE WAS AWARE THAT THE TIRE FAILURE COULD CAUSE A BLOWOUT. THE DEALER REPLACED THE TIRES AND ALIGNED THEM AT NO COST TO HIM. THE CONTACT OWNS B.F. GOODRICH TIRES, TIRE LINE NAME GFORCE T/A KDWS, TIRE SIZE P245/45/17W. THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 20,000. *AK THE DRIVER SIDE POWER SEAT JERKED. UPDATED 03/30/07. 8JB

NHTSA ODI #10183286

Mileage unknown · Feb 21, 2007
SuspensionTires

FRONT TIRES RUB AGAINST STRUT WEARING DOWN THE INSIDE WALL OF TIRE TO WHERE METAL WIRES IN TIRE SHOWING. HAD TO REPLACE ALL TIRES. *JB

NHTSA ODI #10183121

18,800 miles · Feb 21, 2007
SuspensionTires

2004 GTO, ORIGINAL OWNER, TIRES WEARING ON THE INSIDE 1-1/2 TO 2" TREAD DUE TO RUBBING ON STRUTS. AT 19,000 MILES, SURPRISED TO FIND NEXT TO NO TREAD ON THE INSIDE EDGES. REPLACED TIRES WITH SAME ORIGINAL SPECS. WHEELS ARE ALIGNED BUT STILL RUBBING ON STRUT TOWERS. ON-GOING PROBLEM. PREMATURE TIRE WEAR. *JB

NHTSA ODI #10183111

Mileage unknown · Feb 15, 2007
Electrical SystemExterior LightingFuel System, Gasoline

I HAVE HAD TO REPLACE BOTH FRONT TIRES TWICE DUE TO INSIDE TIRE WEAR/PREMATURE WEAR/STRUT RUB (ALL INSIDE WEAR NEAR STRUT). THE INTERMITTENT WIPERS DO NOT FUNCTION PROPERLY (ALL THE TIME). GIVE A FALSE ERROR OF OVERHEATING WITHIN MINUTES OF START-UP (HAPPENED ABOUT A DOZEN TIMES). ANALOG SPEEDOMETER WAS VERY ERRATIC, MOVED ALL A…

Read full complaint

I HAVE HAD TO REPLACE BOTH FRONT TIRES TWICE DUE TO INSIDE TIRE WEAR/PREMATURE WEAR/STRUT RUB (ALL INSIDE WEAR NEAR STRUT). THE INTERMITTENT WIPERS DO NOT FUNCTION PROPERLY (ALL THE TIME). GIVE A FALSE ERROR OF OVERHEATING WITHIN MINUTES OF START-UP (HAPPENED ABOUT A DOZEN TIMES). ANALOG SPEEDOMETER WAS VERY ERRATIC, MOVED ALL AROUND FROM 0 TO 200 MPH WHILE CRUISING AT 65 MPH (2 TIMES) AND READ 140 MPH WHILE STOPPED. PAINT ON THE DOOR HANDLES STARTED PEELING OFF WITHIN 3 MONTHS OF OWNERSHIP (BOUGHT BRAND NEW). DAMPNESS BEHIND THE DRIVES SEAT ON THE FLOOR (OFTEN AFTER DRIVING IN RAIN). RADIO CONTROLS ON STEERING WHEEL DO NOT FUNCTION PROPERLY, A BUTTON HAS THE FUNCTION OF THE ONE ABOVE IT (OFF & ON ALL THE TIME). GAS CAP REPLACED DUE TO PREMATURE WEAR, CAUSED ENGINE LIGHT TO TURN ON (OFTEN, STILL HAPPENS ONCE IN A WHILE WITH THE NEW CAP). HARD TO SHIFT IN REVERSE AT TIMES, HELPS TO SHIFT IN ANOTHER GEAR FIRST. SHIFTER RATTLES OFTEN DURING ACCELERATION. POPS OUT OF 2ND GEAR (MOSTLY DURING COLD MORNINGS, ALSO HARD TO SHIFT INTO 2ND GEAR ON COLD MORNINGS. LIGHTS STAY ON AFTER CAR IS SHUT OFF WHILE IN AUTO-MODE; WORKED CORRECTLY AT FIRST, BUT NOW THEY ALWAYS STAY ON (ALWAYS OPERATE THEM MANUALLY NOW TO KEEP FROM DRAINING BATTERY). *NM

NHTSA ODI #10182719

Mileage unknown · Feb 14, 2007
SuspensionTires

I OWN A 2004 PONTIAC GTO. I RECENTLY SAW A NEWS STORY REGARDING POTENTIAL PROBLEMS WITH THE FRONT TIRES RUBBING AGAINST THE STRUT. I WANTED TO BRING TO YOUR ATTENTION THAT I HAD THE OIL CHANGED IN THE CAR AT A GM DEALERSHIP ABOUT TWO MONTHS AGO. WHILE THERE, THEY MENTIONED TO ME THAT THE RIGHT FRONT TIRE WAS WORN DOWN FROM THE…

Read full complaint

I OWN A 2004 PONTIAC GTO. I RECENTLY SAW A NEWS STORY REGARDING POTENTIAL PROBLEMS WITH THE FRONT TIRES RUBBING AGAINST THE STRUT. I WANTED TO BRING TO YOUR ATTENTION THAT I HAD THE OIL CHANGED IN THE CAR AT A GM DEALERSHIP ABOUT TWO MONTHS AGO. WHILE THERE, THEY MENTIONED TO ME THAT THE RIGHT FRONT TIRE WAS WORN DOWN FROM THE INSIDE AND NEEDED REPLACED. THE CAR ONLY HAS AROUND 12,000 MILES ON IT. *JB

NHTSA ODI #10182583

20,000 miles · Feb 14, 2007
SuspensionTires

MY FRONT TIRES BLEW OUT ON ME AT 20K MILES DUE TO A TIRE RUB ON THE FRONT STRUTS. ABOUT A THREE INCH BAND AROUND THE TIRE WAS COMPLETELY WORN AWAY. *JB

NHTSA ODI #10182582

18,480 miles · Sep 26, 2006
SuspensionTires

I OWN A 2004 PONTIAC GTO. I WAS DRIVING TO WORK ON THE FREEWAY AT 5:30AM ON SEPT. 6, 2006. I WAS PASSING A SEMI TRUCK WHEN THE PASSENGER SIDE FRONT TIRE BLEW OUT. THE VEHICLE PULLED SHARPLY TO THE RIGHT, BUT I WAS ABLE TO REGAIN CONTROL AND AVOID STRIKING THE SEMI. I PULLED THE CAR TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD. THE PASSENGER SIDE FRO…

Read full complaint

I OWN A 2004 PONTIAC GTO. I WAS DRIVING TO WORK ON THE FREEWAY AT 5:30AM ON SEPT. 6, 2006. I WAS PASSING A SEMI TRUCK WHEN THE PASSENGER SIDE FRONT TIRE BLEW OUT. THE VEHICLE PULLED SHARPLY TO THE RIGHT, BUT I WAS ABLE TO REGAIN CONTROL AND AVOID STRIKING THE SEMI. I PULLED THE CAR TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD. THE PASSENGER SIDE FRONT TIRE WAS SHREDDED. THE FRONT TIRES BOTH NEEDED TO BE REPLACED, AND I WAS TOLD THE REAR TIRES WERE WORN TO THE POINT OF REPLACEMENT. WHEN I PICKED THE CAR UP LATER THAT NIGHT, I WAS TOLD BY THE MECHANIC THAT I WAS GOING TO CONTINUE TO HAVE PROBLEMS DUE TO THE FACT THAT THE TIRES WERE TOO WIDE, CAUSING THEM TO RUB AGAINST THE STRUT BRACE. I HAD HIM SHOW ME THE OLD TIRES. THE ONE THAT HAD BLOWN OUT WAS WORN COMPLETELY DOWN TO THE BELTS, AND IT LOOKED AS THOUGH IT HAD BEEN CUT WITH A KNIFE, SIMILAR TO OPENING A TUNA CAN. I ALSO FOUND THAT WHEN THE TIRE BLEW OUT, IT DENTED TO THE TOP OF THE PASSENGER SIDE WHEEL WELL AND SCRATCHED THE FRONT BUMPER. I TOOK THE TIRES WITH ME. THE PONTIAC GTO IS AN IMPORT FROM HOLDEN IN AUSTRAILIA. IN AUSTRAILIA THE VEHICLE IS EQUIPPED WITH 235/45R17 TIRES ON IT. WHEN PONTIAC BROUGHT IT TO THE STATES, THEY EQUIPPED 245/45R17 TIRES ON IT, 10MM WIDER. THE INCREASE IN WIDTH CAUSES THE TIRE TO RUB AGAINST THE STRUT BRACE, MOSTLY ON THE PASSENGER SIDE. THE NEXT DAY I TOOK IT TO THE DEALERSHIP WHERE I BOUGHT IT. THEY TOLD ME IT WAS THE FIRST THEY HAD EVER HEARD OF THE PROBLEM, AND THAT THERE WAS NO RECALL. THE SERVICE MANAGER SAID HE WOULD CALL GM TO SEE WHAT THE DEAL WAS. I HEARD BACK THE NEXT DAY. GM WAS GOING TO REIMBURSE ME FOR 2 OF THE 4 TIRES I PURCHASED AND REDO THE ALIGNMENT BY ADJUSTING THE POSITIVE CAMBER OF THE FRONT TIRES, BUT THEY WANTED THE OLD TIRES BACK. SINCE THAT TIME, I HAVE BEEN OFFERED THE SAME DEAL, WITH THE INCLUSION OF FIXING THE BODY WORK, AND I CAN KEEP THE TIRES. MY GTO HAS LESS THAN 19K MILES ON IT, AND GAVE NO PRIOR INDICATION OF A PROBLEM. *NM

NHTSA ODI #10169324

9,000 miles · Sep 7, 2006
Tires

I PURCHASED A 2004 PONTIAC GTO FROM A LOCAL GM DEALERSHIP IN PELLA, IA. MY CAR WAS SHOWING NOTICEABLE WEAR ON THE INSIDE 1.5-2" ON BOTH FRONT TIRES. AFTER GETTING MY CAR BACK FROM AN OIL CHANGE, THE DEALERSHIP BROUGHT IT TO MY ATTENTION THAT THE FRONT TIRES WERE WORN THROUGH TO THE CORDS ON THE INSIDES ONLY. SINCE THEN, I'VE …

Read full complaint

I PURCHASED A 2004 PONTIAC GTO FROM A LOCAL GM DEALERSHIP IN PELLA, IA. MY CAR WAS SHOWING NOTICEABLE WEAR ON THE INSIDE 1.5-2" ON BOTH FRONT TIRES. AFTER GETTING MY CAR BACK FROM AN OIL CHANGE, THE DEALERSHIP BROUGHT IT TO MY ATTENTION THAT THE FRONT TIRES WERE WORN THROUGH TO THE CORDS ON THE INSIDES ONLY. SINCE THEN, I'VE BEEN IN CONTACT WITH GM SEVERAL TIMES EXPLAINING TO THEM THAT THERE IS A SEVERE SAFETY ISSUE AND IT NEEDS TO GET RESOLVED. THE ANSWER WAS TO REPLACE THE FRONT TIRES WITH NEW AT MY EXPENSE AND WARRANTY WOULD NOT COVER THE SITUATION. THIS OBVIOUSLY DOES NOT FIX THE PROBLEM, NOR DOES IT PAY FOR THE TIRES THAT I HAD BARELY USED IN THE ENTIRE 9,000 MILES OF THE CAR. THE CAR WAS PURCHASED NEW AT JENSENS AUTO CENTER IN PELLA AND I AM THE ONLY OWNER/DRIVER IN THE CARS HISTORY. *NM

NHTSA ODI #10167616

Official recalls

0

No 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

1

PE07010 · Front Strut To Tire Interference

Opened Feb 16, 2007 · Closed Aug 8, 2007

Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Suspension; Suspension:front; Suspension:front:macpherson Strut; Tires; Tires:sidewall

NOTE: THE COMPLAINT AND WARRANTY COUNTS GIVEN IN THE FAILURE REPORT SUMMARY OF THIS RESUME INCLUDE ALL RECORDS RELATED TO TIRE WEAR AND WHEEL ALIGNMENT AND ARE NOT LIMITED TO TIRE-STRUT CONTACT.GENERAL MOTORS (GM) IDENTIFIED TWO CONTRIBUTORS TO PREMATURE FRONT TIRE WEAR IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.ONE OF THE CONTRIBUTORS CAUSING THE PREMATURE TIRE WEAR WAS OUT OF SPECIFICATION NEGATIVE CAMBER.GM STATED THAT EXCESSIVE NEGATIVE CAMBER COULD BE CAUSED BY IMPROPER CAMBER SETTINGS FROM THE FACTORY OR BENDING OF THE FRONT STRUT ASSEMBLIES DUE TO SHARP ROAD IMPACT (I.E., SEVERE POT HOLES).TO IMPROVE CAMBER SETTINGS FROM THE FACTORY, GM STATED THAT FROM FEBRUARY OF 2005 THROUGH MAY OF 2006 SEVERAL MODIFICATIONS WERE MADE TO THE CAMBER SETTING FIXTURE.GM ALSO NOTED THAT EXCESSIVE NEGATIVE CAMBER COULD RESULT IN FRONT TIRE TO STRUT CONTACT, WHICH COULD ALSO BE CAUSED BY USE OF NON-ORIGINAL EQUIPMENT (OE) TIRES AND/OR WHEELS.GM STATED THAT CONTACT OF THE FRONT TIRE AND FRONT STRUT ASSEMBLY CAN CAUSE A POLISHING ON THE TIRE SIDEWALL AND/OR STRUT ASSEMBLY; HOWEVER, THIS DOES NOT CAUSE A SUDDEN LOSS OF AIR. GENERAL MOTORS PROVIDED ODI WITH THE FINAL FACTORY FRONT CAMBER SETTINGS WHERE AVAILABLE FOR COMPLAINT AND WARRANTY CLAIM VEHICLES.APPROXIMATELY 90 PERCENT OF THESE VEHICLES HAD RIGHT WHEEL CAMBER SETTINGS THAT WERE OUT OF DESIGN SPECIFICATION.FOUR PERCENT OF THE VEHICLES HAD LEFT WHEEL CAMBER SETTINGS THAT WERE OUT OF SPECIFICATION.IN A REVIEW OF CONSUMER COMPLAINTS, MOST NOTED EXCESSIVE TIRE WEAR TO VARYING DEGREES TO BOTH FRONT TIRES.FOR COMPLAINTS INDICATING EXCESSIVE WEAR TO A SINGLE FRONT TIRE, 90 PERCENT INVOLVED THE RIGHT SIDE. ALTHOUGH IN SOME CASES THERE ARE INDICATIONS OF TIRE CONTACT WITH FRONT STRUT ASSEMBLIES IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES, ANALYSIS OF TIRE WEAR PATTERNS IN PHOTOGRAPHS SHOWS THE GREATEST WEAR OCCURRING ON THE INBOARD TREAD SURFACE FROM ROAD WEAR AND NOT ON THE AREA OF THE TIRE ON THE UPPER SHOULDER THAT CONTACTS THE STRUT.THIS IS CONSISTENT WITH THE KNOWN TIRE WEAR PATTERNS ASSOCIATED WITH EXCESSIVE NEGATIVE CAMBER, WITH OR WITHOUT STRUT CONTACT.THIS IS MOST APPARENT IN SOME PICTURES, WHICH SHOW MINOR TIRE-STRUT CONTACT WHILE EXHIBITING SIGNIFICANT WEAR OF THE INNER TREAD SURFACE OF THE TIRES.BASED ON DATA REVIEWED DURING THE INVESTIGATION, WHILE EXCESSIVE NEGATIVE CAMBER IS AN APPARENT ISSUE, THE PREMATURE TIRE WEAR APPEARS TO BE PRIMARILY CAUSED BY TIRE TO ROAD SURFACE CONTACT AS OPPOSED TO CONTACT OF THE FRONT TIRES TO THE FRONT STRUT ASSEMBLIES.ODI REVIEWED APPROXIMATELY 1,400 TOTAL COMPLAINTS AND WARRANTY CLAIMS POTENTIALLY RELATED TO THE ALLEGED DEFECT.VIRTUALLY ALL OF THE REPORTS RELATE TO UNEVEN/EXCESSIVE TIRE WEAR OR SOME AWARENESS OF THE TIRE-STRUT CONTACT ISSUE.ODI WAS ABLE TO IDENTIFY 9 TIRE AIR LOSS INCIDENTS ALLEGED TO BE CAUSED BY TIRE-STRUT CONTACT, WITH5 OF THESE DESCRIBING A SLOW AIR LOSS.WHILE THERE WAS EVIDENCE OF TIRE-STRUT CONTACT IN SOME OF THESE VEHICLES, ODI'S ANALYSIS DID NOT FIND THAT THIS CONTACT WAS THE CAUSE OF THE AIR LOSS BUT RATHER A SECONDARY SYMPTOM OF THE EXCESSIVE NEGATIVE CAMBER CONDITION THAT RESULTS IN RAPID ROAD WEAR ON THE INBOARD TREAD SURFACE. ODI IS AWARE OF ONE CRASH ALLEGED TO BE CAUSED BY CONTACT OF THE FRONT STRUT TO FRONT TIRE.HOWEVER, ANALYSIS OF THE INFORMATION PROVIDED BY THE CONSUMER, GM AND A THIRD PARTY INVESTIGATOR DOES NOT INDICATE THAT TIRE-STRUT CONTACT WAS A FACTOR IN THE CRASH.ODI IS UNAWARE OF ANY INJURIES OR FATALITIES ATTRIBUTED TO THE ALLEGED DEFECT. ODI HAS NOT IDENTIFIED A SAFETY RELATED DEFECT TREND IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.ACCORDINGLY, THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF TH

Additional source detail variants (5)

Suspension:front

NOTE: THE COMPLAINT AND WARRANTY COUNTS GIVEN IN THE FAILURE REPORT SUMMARY OF THIS RESUME INCLUDE ALL RECORDS RELATED TO TIRE WEAR AND WHEEL ALIGNMENT AND ARE NOT LIMITED TO TIRE-STRUT CONTACT.GENERAL MOTORS (GM) IDENTIFIED TWO CONTRIBUTORS TO PREMATURE FRONT TIRE WEAR IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.ONE OF THE CONTRIBUTORS CAUSING THE PREMATURE TIRE WEAR WAS OUT OF SPECIFICATION NEGATIVE CAMBER.GM STATED THAT EXCESSIVE NEGATIVE CAMBER COULD BE CAUSED BY IMPROPER CAMBER SETTINGS FROM THE FACTORY OR BENDING OF THE FRONT STRUT ASSEMBLIES DUE TO SHARP ROAD IMPACT (I.E., SEVERE POT HOLES).TO IMPROVE CAMBER SETTINGS FROM THE FACTORY, GM STATED THAT FROM FEBRUARY OF 2005 THROUGH MAY OF 2006 SEVERAL MODIFICATIONS WERE MADE TO THE CAMBER SETTING FIXTURE.GM ALSO NOTED THAT EXCESSIVE NEGATIVE CAMBER COULD RESULT IN FRONT TIRE TO STRUT CONTACT, WHICH COULD ALSO BE CAUSED BY USE OF NON-ORIGINAL EQUIPMENT (OE) TIRES AND/OR WHEELS.GM STATED THAT CONTACT OF THE FRONT TIRE AND FRONT STRUT ASSEMBLY CAN CAUSE A POLISHING ON THE TIRE SIDEWALL AND/OR STRUT ASSEMBLY; HOWEVER, THIS DOES NOT CAUSE A SUDDEN LOSS OF AIR. GENERAL MOTORS PROVIDED ODI WITH THE FINAL FACTORY FRONT CAMBER SETTINGS WHERE AVAILABLE FOR COMPLAINT AND WARRANTY CLAIM VEHICLES.APPROXIMATELY 90 PERCENT OF THESE VEHICLES HAD RIGHT WHEEL CAMBER SETTINGS THAT WERE OUT OF DESIGN SPECIFICATION.FOUR PERCENT OF THE VEHICLES HAD LEFT WHEEL CAMBER SETTINGS THAT WERE OUT OF SPECIFICATION.IN A REVIEW OF CONSUMER COMPLAINTS, MOST NOTED EXCESSIVE TIRE WEAR TO VARYING DEGREES TO BOTH FRONT TIRES.FOR COMPLAINTS INDICATING EXCESSIVE WEAR TO A SINGLE FRONT TIRE, 90 PERCENT INVOLVED THE RIGHT SIDE. ALTHOUGH IN SOME CASES THERE ARE INDICATIONS OF TIRE CONTACT WITH FRONT STRUT ASSEMBLIES IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES, ANALYSIS OF TIRE WEAR PATTERNS IN PHOTOGRAPHS SHOWS THE GREATEST WEAR OCCURRING ON THE INBOARD TREAD SURFACE FROM ROAD WEAR AND NOT ON THE AREA OF THE TIRE ON THE UPPER SHOULDER THAT CONTACTS THE STRUT.THIS IS CONSISTENT WITH THE KNOWN TIRE WEAR PATTERNS ASSOCIATED WITH EXCESSIVE NEGATIVE CAMBER, WITH OR WITHOUT STRUT CONTACT.THIS IS MOST APPARENT IN SOME PICTURES, WHICH SHOW MINOR TIRE-STRUT CONTACT WHILE EXHIBITING SIGNIFICANT WEAR OF THE INNER TREAD SURFACE OF THE TIRES.BASED ON DATA REVIEWED DURING THE INVESTIGATION, WHILE EXCESSIVE NEGATIVE CAMBER IS AN APPARENT ISSUE, THE PREMATURE TIRE WEAR APPEARS TO BE PRIMARILY CAUSED BY TIRE TO ROAD SURFACE CONTACT AS OPPOSED TO CONTACT OF THE FRONT TIRES TO THE FRONT STRUT ASSEMBLIES.ODI REVIEWED APPROXIMATELY 1,400 TOTAL COMPLAINTS AND WARRANTY CLAIMS POTENTIALLY RELATED TO THE ALLEGED DEFECT.VIRTUALLY ALL OF THE REPORTS RELATE TO UNEVEN/EXCESSIVE TIRE WEAR OR SOME AWARENESS OF THE TIRE-STRUT CONTACT ISSUE.ODI WAS ABLE TO IDENTIFY 9 TIRE AIR LOSS INCIDENTS ALLEGED TO BE CAUSED BY TIRE-STRUT CONTACT, WITH5 OF THESE DESCRIBING A SLOW AIR LOSS.WHILE THERE WAS EVIDENCE OF TIRE-STRUT CONTACT IN SOME OF THESE VEHICLES, ODI'S ANALYSIS DID NOT FIND THAT THIS CONTACT WAS THE CAUSE OF THE AIR LOSS BUT RATHER A SECONDARY SYMPTOM OF THE EXCESSIVE NEGATIVE CAMBER CONDITION THAT RESULTS IN RAPID ROAD WEAR ON THE INBOARD TREAD SURFACE. ODI IS AWARE OF ONE CRASH ALLEGED TO BE CAUSED BY CONTACT OF THE FRONT STRUT TO FRONT TIRE.HOWEVER, ANALYSIS OF THE INFORMATION PROVIDED BY THE CONSUMER, GM AND A THIRD PARTY INVESTIGATOR DOES NOT INDICATE THAT TIRE-STRUT CONTACT WAS A FACTOR IN THE CRASH.ODI IS UNAWARE OF ANY INJURIES OR FATALITIES ATTRIBUTED TO THE ALLEGED DEFECT. ODI HAS NOT IDENTIFIED A SAFETY RELATED DEFECT TREND IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.ACCORDINGLY, THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF TH

Suspension:front:macpherson Strut

NOTE: THE COMPLAINT AND WARRANTY COUNTS GIVEN IN THE FAILURE REPORT SUMMARY OF THIS RESUME INCLUDE ALL RECORDS RELATED TO TIRE WEAR AND WHEEL ALIGNMENT AND ARE NOT LIMITED TO TIRE-STRUT CONTACT.GENERAL MOTORS (GM) IDENTIFIED TWO CONTRIBUTORS TO PREMATURE FRONT TIRE WEAR IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.ONE OF THE CONTRIBUTORS CAUSING THE PREMATURE TIRE WEAR WAS OUT OF SPECIFICATION NEGATIVE CAMBER.GM STATED THAT EXCESSIVE NEGATIVE CAMBER COULD BE CAUSED BY IMPROPER CAMBER SETTINGS FROM THE FACTORY OR BENDING OF THE FRONT STRUT ASSEMBLIES DUE TO SHARP ROAD IMPACT (I.E., SEVERE POT HOLES).TO IMPROVE CAMBER SETTINGS FROM THE FACTORY, GM STATED THAT FROM FEBRUARY OF 2005 THROUGH MAY OF 2006 SEVERAL MODIFICATIONS WERE MADE TO THE CAMBER SETTING FIXTURE.GM ALSO NOTED THAT EXCESSIVE NEGATIVE CAMBER COULD RESULT IN FRONT TIRE TO STRUT CONTACT, WHICH COULD ALSO BE CAUSED BY USE OF NON-ORIGINAL EQUIPMENT (OE) TIRES AND/OR WHEELS.GM STATED THAT CONTACT OF THE FRONT TIRE AND FRONT STRUT ASSEMBLY CAN CAUSE A POLISHING ON THE TIRE SIDEWALL AND/OR STRUT ASSEMBLY; HOWEVER, THIS DOES NOT CAUSE A SUDDEN LOSS OF AIR. GENERAL MOTORS PROVIDED ODI WITH THE FINAL FACTORY FRONT CAMBER SETTINGS WHERE AVAILABLE FOR COMPLAINT AND WARRANTY CLAIM VEHICLES.APPROXIMATELY 90 PERCENT OF THESE VEHICLES HAD RIGHT WHEEL CAMBER SETTINGS THAT WERE OUT OF DESIGN SPECIFICATION.FOUR PERCENT OF THE VEHICLES HAD LEFT WHEEL CAMBER SETTINGS THAT WERE OUT OF SPECIFICATION.IN A REVIEW OF CONSUMER COMPLAINTS, MOST NOTED EXCESSIVE TIRE WEAR TO VARYING DEGREES TO BOTH FRONT TIRES.FOR COMPLAINTS INDICATING EXCESSIVE WEAR TO A SINGLE FRONT TIRE, 90 PERCENT INVOLVED THE RIGHT SIDE. ALTHOUGH IN SOME CASES THERE ARE INDICATIONS OF TIRE CONTACT WITH FRONT STRUT ASSEMBLIES IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES, ANALYSIS OF TIRE WEAR PATTERNS IN PHOTOGRAPHS SHOWS THE GREATEST WEAR OCCURRING ON THE INBOARD TREAD SURFACE FROM ROAD WEAR AND NOT ON THE AREA OF THE TIRE ON THE UPPER SHOULDER THAT CONTACTS THE STRUT.THIS IS CONSISTENT WITH THE KNOWN TIRE WEAR PATTERNS ASSOCIATED WITH EXCESSIVE NEGATIVE CAMBER, WITH OR WITHOUT STRUT CONTACT.THIS IS MOST APPARENT IN SOME PICTURES, WHICH SHOW MINOR TIRE-STRUT CONTACT WHILE EXHIBITING SIGNIFICANT WEAR OF THE INNER TREAD SURFACE OF THE TIRES.BASED ON DATA REVIEWED DURING THE INVESTIGATION, WHILE EXCESSIVE NEGATIVE CAMBER IS AN APPARENT ISSUE, THE PREMATURE TIRE WEAR APPEARS TO BE PRIMARILY CAUSED BY TIRE TO ROAD SURFACE CONTACT AS OPPOSED TO CONTACT OF THE FRONT TIRES TO THE FRONT STRUT ASSEMBLIES.ODI REVIEWED APPROXIMATELY 1,400 TOTAL COMPLAINTS AND WARRANTY CLAIMS POTENTIALLY RELATED TO THE ALLEGED DEFECT.VIRTUALLY ALL OF THE REPORTS RELATE TO UNEVEN/EXCESSIVE TIRE WEAR OR SOME AWARENESS OF THE TIRE-STRUT CONTACT ISSUE.ODI WAS ABLE TO IDENTIFY 9 TIRE AIR LOSS INCIDENTS ALLEGED TO BE CAUSED BY TIRE-STRUT CONTACT, WITH5 OF THESE DESCRIBING A SLOW AIR LOSS.WHILE THERE WAS EVIDENCE OF TIRE-STRUT CONTACT IN SOME OF THESE VEHICLES, ODI'S ANALYSIS DID NOT FIND THAT THIS CONTACT WAS THE CAUSE OF THE AIR LOSS BUT RATHER A SECONDARY SYMPTOM OF THE EXCESSIVE NEGATIVE CAMBER CONDITION THAT RESULTS IN RAPID ROAD WEAR ON THE INBOARD TREAD SURFACE. ODI IS AWARE OF ONE CRASH ALLEGED TO BE CAUSED BY CONTACT OF THE FRONT STRUT TO FRONT TIRE.HOWEVER, ANALYSIS OF THE INFORMATION PROVIDED BY THE CONSUMER, GM AND A THIRD PARTY INVESTIGATOR DOES NOT INDICATE THAT TIRE-STRUT CONTACT WAS A FACTOR IN THE CRASH.ODI IS UNAWARE OF ANY INJURIES OR FATALITIES ATTRIBUTED TO THE ALLEGED DEFECT. ODI HAS NOT IDENTIFIED A SAFETY RELATED DEFECT TREND IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.ACCORDINGLY, THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF TH

Suspension

NOTE: THE COMPLAINT AND WARRANTY COUNTS GIVEN IN THE FAILURE REPORT SUMMARY OF THIS RESUME INCLUDE ALL RECORDS RELATED TO TIRE WEAR AND WHEEL ALIGNMENT AND ARE NOT LIMITED TO TIRE-STRUT CONTACT.GENERAL MOTORS (GM) IDENTIFIED TWO CONTRIBUTORS TO PREMATURE FRONT TIRE WEAR IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.ONE OF THE CONTRIBUTORS CAUSING THE PREMATURE TIRE WEAR WAS OUT OF SPECIFICATION NEGATIVE CAMBER.GM STATED THAT EXCESSIVE NEGATIVE CAMBER COULD BE CAUSED BY IMPROPER CAMBER SETTINGS FROM THE FACTORY OR BENDING OF THE FRONT STRUT ASSEMBLIES DUE TO SHARP ROAD IMPACT (I.E., SEVERE POT HOLES).TO IMPROVE CAMBER SETTINGS FROM THE FACTORY, GM STATED THAT FROM FEBRUARY OF 2005 THROUGH MAY OF 2006 SEVERAL MODIFICATIONS WERE MADE TO THE CAMBER SETTING FIXTURE.GM ALSO NOTED THAT EXCESSIVE NEGATIVE CAMBER COULD RESULT IN FRONT TIRE TO STRUT CONTACT, WHICH COULD ALSO BE CAUSED BY USE OF NON-ORIGINAL EQUIPMENT (OE) TIRES AND/OR WHEELS.GM STATED THAT CONTACT OF THE FRONT TIRE AND FRONT STRUT ASSEMBLY CAN CAUSE A POLISHING ON THE TIRE SIDEWALL AND/OR STRUT ASSEMBLY; HOWEVER, THIS DOES NOT CAUSE A SUDDEN LOSS OF AIR. GENERAL MOTORS PROVIDED ODI WITH THE FINAL FACTORY FRONT CAMBER SETTINGS WHERE AVAILABLE FOR COMPLAINT AND WARRANTY CLAIM VEHICLES.APPROXIMATELY 90 PERCENT OF THESE VEHICLES HAD RIGHT WHEEL CAMBER SETTINGS THAT WERE OUT OF DESIGN SPECIFICATION.FOUR PERCENT OF THE VEHICLES HAD LEFT WHEEL CAMBER SETTINGS THAT WERE OUT OF SPECIFICATION.IN A REVIEW OF CONSUMER COMPLAINTS, MOST NOTED EXCESSIVE TIRE WEAR TO VARYING DEGREES TO BOTH FRONT TIRES.FOR COMPLAINTS INDICATING EXCESSIVE WEAR TO A SINGLE FRONT TIRE, 90 PERCENT INVOLVED THE RIGHT SIDE. ALTHOUGH IN SOME CASES THERE ARE INDICATIONS OF TIRE CONTACT WITH FRONT STRUT ASSEMBLIES IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES, ANALYSIS OF TIRE WEAR PATTERNS IN PHOTOGRAPHS SHOWS THE GREATEST WEAR OCCURRING ON THE INBOARD TREAD SURFACE FROM ROAD WEAR AND NOT ON THE AREA OF THE TIRE ON THE UPPER SHOULDER THAT CONTACTS THE STRUT.THIS IS CONSISTENT WITH THE KNOWN TIRE WEAR PATTERNS ASSOCIATED WITH EXCESSIVE NEGATIVE CAMBER, WITH OR WITHOUT STRUT CONTACT.THIS IS MOST APPARENT IN SOME PICTURES, WHICH SHOW MINOR TIRE-STRUT CONTACT WHILE EXHIBITING SIGNIFICANT WEAR OF THE INNER TREAD SURFACE OF THE TIRES.BASED ON DATA REVIEWED DURING THE INVESTIGATION, WHILE EXCESSIVE NEGATIVE CAMBER IS AN APPARENT ISSUE, THE PREMATURE TIRE WEAR APPEARS TO BE PRIMARILY CAUSED BY TIRE TO ROAD SURFACE CONTACT AS OPPOSED TO CONTACT OF THE FRONT TIRES TO THE FRONT STRUT ASSEMBLIES.ODI REVIEWED APPROXIMATELY 1,400 TOTAL COMPLAINTS AND WARRANTY CLAIMS POTENTIALLY RELATED TO THE ALLEGED DEFECT.VIRTUALLY ALL OF THE REPORTS RELATE TO UNEVEN/EXCESSIVE TIRE WEAR OR SOME AWARENESS OF THE TIRE-STRUT CONTACT ISSUE.ODI WAS ABLE TO IDENTIFY 9 TIRE AIR LOSS INCIDENTS ALLEGED TO BE CAUSED BY TIRE-STRUT CONTACT, WITH5 OF THESE DESCRIBING A SLOW AIR LOSS.WHILE THERE WAS EVIDENCE OF TIRE-STRUT CONTACT IN SOME OF THESE VEHICLES, ODI'S ANALYSIS DID NOT FIND THAT THIS CONTACT WAS THE CAUSE OF THE AIR LOSS BUT RATHER A SECONDARY SYMPTOM OF THE EXCESSIVE NEGATIVE CAMBER CONDITION THAT RESULTS IN RAPID ROAD WEAR ON THE INBOARD TREAD SURFACE. ODI IS AWARE OF ONE CRASH ALLEGED TO BE CAUSED BY CONTACT OF THE FRONT STRUT TO FRONT TIRE.HOWEVER, ANALYSIS OF THE INFORMATION PROVIDED BY THE CONSUMER, GM AND A THIRD PARTY INVESTIGATOR DOES NOT INDICATE THAT TIRE-STRUT CONTACT WAS A FACTOR IN THE CRASH.ODI IS UNAWARE OF ANY INJURIES OR FATALITIES ATTRIBUTED TO THE ALLEGED DEFECT. ODI HAS NOT IDENTIFIED A SAFETY RELATED DEFECT TREND IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.ACCORDINGLY, THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF TH

Tires

NOTE: THE COMPLAINT AND WARRANTY COUNTS GIVEN IN THE FAILURE REPORT SUMMARY OF THIS RESUME INCLUDE ALL RECORDS RELATED TO TIRE WEAR AND WHEEL ALIGNMENT AND ARE NOT LIMITED TO TIRE-STRUT CONTACT.GENERAL MOTORS (GM) IDENTIFIED TWO CONTRIBUTORS TO PREMATURE FRONT TIRE WEAR IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.ONE OF THE CONTRIBUTORS CAUSING THE PREMATURE TIRE WEAR WAS OUT OF SPECIFICATION NEGATIVE CAMBER.GM STATED THAT EXCESSIVE NEGATIVE CAMBER COULD BE CAUSED BY IMPROPER CAMBER SETTINGS FROM THE FACTORY OR BENDING OF THE FRONT STRUT ASSEMBLIES DUE TO SHARP ROAD IMPACT (I.E., SEVERE POT HOLES).TO IMPROVE CAMBER SETTINGS FROM THE FACTORY, GM STATED THAT FROM FEBRUARY OF 2005 THROUGH MAY OF 2006 SEVERAL MODIFICATIONS WERE MADE TO THE CAMBER SETTING FIXTURE.GM ALSO NOTED THAT EXCESSIVE NEGATIVE CAMBER COULD RESULT IN FRONT TIRE TO STRUT CONTACT, WHICH COULD ALSO BE CAUSED BY USE OF NON-ORIGINAL EQUIPMENT (OE) TIRES AND/OR WHEELS.GM STATED THAT CONTACT OF THE FRONT TIRE AND FRONT STRUT ASSEMBLY CAN CAUSE A POLISHING ON THE TIRE SIDEWALL AND/OR STRUT ASSEMBLY; HOWEVER, THIS DOES NOT CAUSE A SUDDEN LOSS OF AIR. GENERAL MOTORS PROVIDED ODI WITH THE FINAL FACTORY FRONT CAMBER SETTINGS WHERE AVAILABLE FOR COMPLAINT AND WARRANTY CLAIM VEHICLES.APPROXIMATELY 90 PERCENT OF THESE VEHICLES HAD RIGHT WHEEL CAMBER SETTINGS THAT WERE OUT OF DESIGN SPECIFICATION.FOUR PERCENT OF THE VEHICLES HAD LEFT WHEEL CAMBER SETTINGS THAT WERE OUT OF SPECIFICATION.IN A REVIEW OF CONSUMER COMPLAINTS, MOST NOTED EXCESSIVE TIRE WEAR TO VARYING DEGREES TO BOTH FRONT TIRES.FOR COMPLAINTS INDICATING EXCESSIVE WEAR TO A SINGLE FRONT TIRE, 90 PERCENT INVOLVED THE RIGHT SIDE. ALTHOUGH IN SOME CASES THERE ARE INDICATIONS OF TIRE CONTACT WITH FRONT STRUT ASSEMBLIES IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES, ANALYSIS OF TIRE WEAR PATTERNS IN PHOTOGRAPHS SHOWS THE GREATEST WEAR OCCURRING ON THE INBOARD TREAD SURFACE FROM ROAD WEAR AND NOT ON THE AREA OF THE TIRE ON THE UPPER SHOULDER THAT CONTACTS THE STRUT.THIS IS CONSISTENT WITH THE KNOWN TIRE WEAR PATTERNS ASSOCIATED WITH EXCESSIVE NEGATIVE CAMBER, WITH OR WITHOUT STRUT CONTACT.THIS IS MOST APPARENT IN SOME PICTURES, WHICH SHOW MINOR TIRE-STRUT CONTACT WHILE EXHIBITING SIGNIFICANT WEAR OF THE INNER TREAD SURFACE OF THE TIRES.BASED ON DATA REVIEWED DURING THE INVESTIGATION, WHILE EXCESSIVE NEGATIVE CAMBER IS AN APPARENT ISSUE, THE PREMATURE TIRE WEAR APPEARS TO BE PRIMARILY CAUSED BY TIRE TO ROAD SURFACE CONTACT AS OPPOSED TO CONTACT OF THE FRONT TIRES TO THE FRONT STRUT ASSEMBLIES.ODI REVIEWED APPROXIMATELY 1,400 TOTAL COMPLAINTS AND WARRANTY CLAIMS POTENTIALLY RELATED TO THE ALLEGED DEFECT.VIRTUALLY ALL OF THE REPORTS RELATE TO UNEVEN/EXCESSIVE TIRE WEAR OR SOME AWARENESS OF THE TIRE-STRUT CONTACT ISSUE.ODI WAS ABLE TO IDENTIFY 9 TIRE AIR LOSS INCIDENTS ALLEGED TO BE CAUSED BY TIRE-STRUT CONTACT, WITH5 OF THESE DESCRIBING A SLOW AIR LOSS.WHILE THERE WAS EVIDENCE OF TIRE-STRUT CONTACT IN SOME OF THESE VEHICLES, ODI'S ANALYSIS DID NOT FIND THAT THIS CONTACT WAS THE CAUSE OF THE AIR LOSS BUT RATHER A SECONDARY SYMPTOM OF THE EXCESSIVE NEGATIVE CAMBER CONDITION THAT RESULTS IN RAPID ROAD WEAR ON THE INBOARD TREAD SURFACE. ODI IS AWARE OF ONE CRASH ALLEGED TO BE CAUSED BY CONTACT OF THE FRONT STRUT TO FRONT TIRE.HOWEVER, ANALYSIS OF THE INFORMATION PROVIDED BY THE CONSUMER, GM AND A THIRD PARTY INVESTIGATOR DOES NOT INDICATE THAT TIRE-STRUT CONTACT WAS A FACTOR IN THE CRASH.ODI IS UNAWARE OF ANY INJURIES OR FATALITIES ATTRIBUTED TO THE ALLEGED DEFECT. ODI HAS NOT IDENTIFIED A SAFETY RELATED DEFECT TREND IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.ACCORDINGLY, THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF TH

Tires:sidewall

NOTE: THE COMPLAINT AND WARRANTY COUNTS GIVEN IN THE FAILURE REPORT SUMMARY OF THIS RESUME INCLUDE ALL RECORDS RELATED TO TIRE WEAR AND WHEEL ALIGNMENT AND ARE NOT LIMITED TO TIRE-STRUT CONTACT.GENERAL MOTORS (GM) IDENTIFIED TWO CONTRIBUTORS TO PREMATURE FRONT TIRE WEAR IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.ONE OF THE CONTRIBUTORS CAUSING THE PREMATURE TIRE WEAR WAS OUT OF SPECIFICATION NEGATIVE CAMBER.GM STATED THAT EXCESSIVE NEGATIVE CAMBER COULD BE CAUSED BY IMPROPER CAMBER SETTINGS FROM THE FACTORY OR BENDING OF THE FRONT STRUT ASSEMBLIES DUE TO SHARP ROAD IMPACT (I.E., SEVERE POT HOLES).TO IMPROVE CAMBER SETTINGS FROM THE FACTORY, GM STATED THAT FROM FEBRUARY OF 2005 THROUGH MAY OF 2006 SEVERAL MODIFICATIONS WERE MADE TO THE CAMBER SETTING FIXTURE.GM ALSO NOTED THAT EXCESSIVE NEGATIVE CAMBER COULD RESULT IN FRONT TIRE TO STRUT CONTACT, WHICH COULD ALSO BE CAUSED BY USE OF NON-ORIGINAL EQUIPMENT (OE) TIRES AND/OR WHEELS.GM STATED THAT CONTACT OF THE FRONT TIRE AND FRONT STRUT ASSEMBLY CAN CAUSE A POLISHING ON THE TIRE SIDEWALL AND/OR STRUT ASSEMBLY; HOWEVER, THIS DOES NOT CAUSE A SUDDEN LOSS OF AIR. GENERAL MOTORS PROVIDED ODI WITH THE FINAL FACTORY FRONT CAMBER SETTINGS WHERE AVAILABLE FOR COMPLAINT AND WARRANTY CLAIM VEHICLES.APPROXIMATELY 90 PERCENT OF THESE VEHICLES HAD RIGHT WHEEL CAMBER SETTINGS THAT WERE OUT OF DESIGN SPECIFICATION.FOUR PERCENT OF THE VEHICLES HAD LEFT WHEEL CAMBER SETTINGS THAT WERE OUT OF SPECIFICATION.IN A REVIEW OF CONSUMER COMPLAINTS, MOST NOTED EXCESSIVE TIRE WEAR TO VARYING DEGREES TO BOTH FRONT TIRES.FOR COMPLAINTS INDICATING EXCESSIVE WEAR TO A SINGLE FRONT TIRE, 90 PERCENT INVOLVED THE RIGHT SIDE. ALTHOUGH IN SOME CASES THERE ARE INDICATIONS OF TIRE CONTACT WITH FRONT STRUT ASSEMBLIES IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES, ANALYSIS OF TIRE WEAR PATTERNS IN PHOTOGRAPHS SHOWS THE GREATEST WEAR OCCURRING ON THE INBOARD TREAD SURFACE FROM ROAD WEAR AND NOT ON THE AREA OF THE TIRE ON THE UPPER SHOULDER THAT CONTACTS THE STRUT.THIS IS CONSISTENT WITH THE KNOWN TIRE WEAR PATTERNS ASSOCIATED WITH EXCESSIVE NEGATIVE CAMBER, WITH OR WITHOUT STRUT CONTACT.THIS IS MOST APPARENT IN SOME PICTURES, WHICH SHOW MINOR TIRE-STRUT CONTACT WHILE EXHIBITING SIGNIFICANT WEAR OF THE INNER TREAD SURFACE OF THE TIRES.BASED ON DATA REVIEWED DURING THE INVESTIGATION, WHILE EXCESSIVE NEGATIVE CAMBER IS AN APPARENT ISSUE, THE PREMATURE TIRE WEAR APPEARS TO BE PRIMARILY CAUSED BY TIRE TO ROAD SURFACE CONTACT AS OPPOSED TO CONTACT OF THE FRONT TIRES TO THE FRONT STRUT ASSEMBLIES.ODI REVIEWED APPROXIMATELY 1,400 TOTAL COMPLAINTS AND WARRANTY CLAIMS POTENTIALLY RELATED TO THE ALLEGED DEFECT.VIRTUALLY ALL OF THE REPORTS RELATE TO UNEVEN/EXCESSIVE TIRE WEAR OR SOME AWARENESS OF THE TIRE-STRUT CONTACT ISSUE.ODI WAS ABLE TO IDENTIFY 9 TIRE AIR LOSS INCIDENTS ALLEGED TO BE CAUSED BY TIRE-STRUT CONTACT, WITH5 OF THESE DESCRIBING A SLOW AIR LOSS.WHILE THERE WAS EVIDENCE OF TIRE-STRUT CONTACT IN SOME OF THESE VEHICLES, ODI'S ANALYSIS DID NOT FIND THAT THIS CONTACT WAS THE CAUSE OF THE AIR LOSS BUT RATHER A SECONDARY SYMPTOM OF THE EXCESSIVE NEGATIVE CAMBER CONDITION THAT RESULTS IN RAPID ROAD WEAR ON THE INBOARD TREAD SURFACE. ODI IS AWARE OF ONE CRASH ALLEGED TO BE CAUSED BY CONTACT OF THE FRONT STRUT TO FRONT TIRE.HOWEVER, ANALYSIS OF THE INFORMATION PROVIDED BY THE CONSUMER, GM AND A THIRD PARTY INVESTIGATOR DOES NOT INDICATE THAT TIRE-STRUT CONTACT WAS A FACTOR IN THE CRASH.ODI IS UNAWARE OF ANY INJURIES OR FATALITIES ATTRIBUTED TO THE ALLEGED DEFECT. ODI HAS NOT IDENTIFIED A SAFETY RELATED DEFECT TREND IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.ACCORDINGLY, THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF TH