← 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

What owners actually said

245 reports
16,000 miles · May 30, 2007
Suspension

I NOTICED ALL TIRES WERE WORN ON INSIDE PAST THE TREAD AT 14,000 MILES ON CAR. I REPLACED ALL 4 TIRES AND TOOK THE CAR FOR ALIGNMENT. MECHANIC POINTED OUT THAT THE FRONT TIRES WERE HITTING THE STRUT MOUNTS WHEN HITTING A BUMP WHEN SPRINGS COMPRESSED OR DURING HARD CORNERING. A GROOVE WAS ALREADY WORN IN MY NEW FRONT LEFT TIRE…

Read full complaint

I NOTICED ALL TIRES WERE WORN ON INSIDE PAST THE TREAD AT 14,000 MILES ON CAR. I REPLACED ALL 4 TIRES AND TOOK THE CAR FOR ALIGNMENT. MECHANIC POINTED OUT THAT THE FRONT TIRES WERE HITTING THE STRUT MOUNTS WHEN HITTING A BUMP WHEN SPRINGS COMPRESSED OR DURING HARD CORNERING. A GROOVE WAS ALREADY WORN IN MY NEW FRONT LEFT TIRE. ALIGNMENT WAS WITHIN SPECS. I WENT TO DEALER AND THEY SAID THAT MORE CAMBER WOULD KEEP FROM RUBBING. DEALERS ALIGNMENT READINGS WERE DIFFERENT THAN ALIGNMENT SHOP. I HAVE SINCE DISCOVERED MANY OTHER 2004-2006 GTO OWNERS HAVE THE SAME PROBLEM. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10192075

23,000 miles · May 29, 2007
Tires

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 PONTIAC GTO. WHILE DRIVING 35 MPH, THE DRIVERS SIDE REAR TIRE BLEW OUT. THE FAILURE DID NOT CAUSE ANY DAMAGE, BUT THE DEALER STATED THAT THE REMAINING THREE TIRES WERE ALSO GOING TO BLOW OUT. THE TIRES DISPLAYED CORDS AND AN ALIGNMENT WAS PERFORMED AT 15,000 MILES. THE CURRENT AND FAILURE MILEAGES …

Read full complaint

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 PONTIAC GTO. WHILE DRIVING 35 MPH, THE DRIVERS SIDE REAR TIRE BLEW OUT. THE FAILURE DID NOT CAUSE ANY DAMAGE, BUT THE DEALER STATED THAT THE REMAINING THREE TIRES WERE ALSO GOING TO BLOW OUT. THE TIRES DISPLAYED CORDS AND AN ALIGNMENT WAS PERFORMED AT 15,000 MILES. THE CURRENT AND FAILURE MILEAGES WERE 23,000.

NHTSA ODI #10191887

Mileage unknown · May 22, 2007
Suspension

PREMATURE TIRE FAILURE. FRONT TIRES RUBBING THE STRUTS NEAR THE TOP. CAR HAS 36,000 MILES ON IT. 10 TIRES PURCHASED, FRONT END HAS BEEN ALIGNED BY DEALER 7 TIMES (AT MY EXPENSE) IN LAST 22,000 MILES TO CORRECT. I AM AWARE THAT THIS ISSUE EXISTS WITH THIS CAR AND CLOSELY MONITOR THE TIRES AND REPLACE THEM WHEN THE RUBBED AREA…

Read full complaint

PREMATURE TIRE FAILURE. FRONT TIRES RUBBING THE STRUTS NEAR THE TOP. CAR HAS 36,000 MILES ON IT. 10 TIRES PURCHASED, FRONT END HAS BEEN ALIGNED BY DEALER 7 TIMES (AT MY EXPENSE) IN LAST 22,000 MILES TO CORRECT. I AM AWARE THAT THIS ISSUE EXISTS WITH THIS CAR AND CLOSELY MONITOR THE TIRES AND REPLACE THEM WHEN THE RUBBED AREA GETS VISIBLY WORSE.

NHTSA ODI #10191461

5,600 miles · May 21, 2007
Tires

I TOOK THE 2004 GTO TO DEALER FOR AN OIL CHANGE AND TIRE ROTATION TO COLONIAL TIRE NEAR MY HOME THEY FOUND THE RIGHT FRONT INSIDE OF THE TIRE WAS WORN DOWN TO THE BELTS AND NEEDED TO BE REPLACED IMMEDIATELY. ALSO, THEY FOUND A REAR TIRE MISSING ABOUT 3" OF TREAD AND THAT REQUIRED REPLACEMENT. I HAVE NOT READ THAT THIS YEAR AND…

Read full complaint

I TOOK THE 2004 GTO TO DEALER FOR AN OIL CHANGE AND TIRE ROTATION TO COLONIAL TIRE NEAR MY HOME THEY FOUND THE RIGHT FRONT INSIDE OF THE TIRE WAS WORN DOWN TO THE BELTS AND NEEDED TO BE REPLACED IMMEDIATELY. ALSO, THEY FOUND A REAR TIRE MISSING ABOUT 3" OF TREAD AND THAT REQUIRED REPLACEMENT. I HAVE NOT READ THAT THIS YEAR AND MODEL GTO HAD A STRUT PROBLEM THAT CAUSED IT TO RUB AGAINST THE FRONT TIRES, AND THAT THE TIRES CHUNKED EASILY. THERE WAS NO ACCIDENT OR INJURY INVOLVED. IT COST ME $437. *AK

NHTSA ODI #10191351

Mileage unknown · May 19, 2007
Suspension

AS A 2004 GTO OWNER I HAD TO REPLACE THE TIRES 3 TIMES PREMATURELY, 15,000-20,000 MILES ON A TIRE RATED AT 35,000 DUE TO FRONT END STRUT RUB. I HAD TO SPEND SEVERAL THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS TO FIX A PROBLEM GM CREATED. I HAVE BEEN TO GM DEALER WHILE THE VEHICLE WAS STILL UNDER WARRANTY, AND THEY WOULD NOT DO ANYTHING ABOUT THE …

Read full complaint

AS A 2004 GTO OWNER I HAD TO REPLACE THE TIRES 3 TIMES PREMATURELY, 15,000-20,000 MILES ON A TIRE RATED AT 35,000 DUE TO FRONT END STRUT RUB. I HAD TO SPEND SEVERAL THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS TO FIX A PROBLEM GM CREATED. I HAVE BEEN TO GM DEALER WHILE THE VEHICLE WAS STILL UNDER WARRANTY, AND THEY WOULD NOT DO ANYTHING ABOUT THE SITUATION ,AND THAT EVERYTHING WAS IN SPECS. I LITERALLY HAD TO BUY A LIFETIME ALIGNMENT POLICY ON THE VEHICLE TO CONSTANTLY STAY AFTER THE ALIGNMENT SITUATION THAT WAS CAUSING STRUT RUB. I HAVE SINCE REPLACED EVERY BUSHING IN THE FRONT END WITH AFTER MARKET, AND THE UNAFFECTED REAR END), AND THE SHOCKS AND STRUTS TO CURE THE PROBLEM THAT GM REFUSED TO FIX. AFTER THE NEW SUSPENSION AND TIRES BOUGHT AT THE SAME TIME, AND OVER 5,000 MILES ON IT , I HAVE NO MORE PREMATURE TIRE WEAR AS OF THIS POINT. THE DATE BELOW WAS THE APPROXIMATE DATE I BOUGHT THE VEHICLE AS THERE WAS NO INCIDENT. *AK

NHTSA ODI #10191222

Mileage unknown · May 18, 2007
Tires

I AM AN OWNER OF A DEFECTIVE 2004 PONTIAC GTO. I AM ALSO AN AUTOMOTIVE DESIGNER AND ENGINEER. MY WIFE AND I FIRST LEARNED OF THE POTENTIAL FOR THIS PROBLEM ALONG WITH MANY OTHERS THROUGH OUR COMPANY OWNED WEBSITES. WWW.AEDCENTRAL.COM. PROPER ROTATION TECHNIQUES WERE USED ETC TO INSURE THIS WAS NOT AN ISSUE WITH OUR VEHICLE. …

Read full complaint

I AM AN OWNER OF A DEFECTIVE 2004 PONTIAC GTO. I AM ALSO AN AUTOMOTIVE DESIGNER AND ENGINEER. MY WIFE AND I FIRST LEARNED OF THE POTENTIAL FOR THIS PROBLEM ALONG WITH MANY OTHERS THROUGH OUR COMPANY OWNED WEBSITES. WWW.AEDCENTRAL.COM. PROPER ROTATION TECHNIQUES WERE USED ETC TO INSURE THIS WAS NOT AN ISSUE WITH OUR VEHICLE. UNDER MY FIRST INSPECTIONS THIS PROBLEM WAS NOT DETECTED. YESTERDAY MY, WIFE AND I WERE DRIVING IN THE 2004 PONTIAC GTO IN THE RULE AREA, CALIFORNIA MOUNTAINS, AND DISCOVERED THIS POTENTIAL PROBLEM IN THE MOST FRIGHTENING MANNER. WHILE DRIVING AT THE POSTED SPEED LIMIT 55 MPH THROUGH CURVES IN THE MOUNTAINS AND VEHICLE HAD ALMOST DRIFTED RIGHT OFF A CLIFF'S EDGE. REALIZING THAT WE WERE HEADING IN THIS DIRECTION , OFF THE CLIFF, I WAS FORCED TO ENGAGE THE EMERGENCY BRAKE AND SLIDE THE VEHICLE AWAY FROM GOING OFF THE CLIFF. TWO LIVES COULD HAVE BEEN LOST DUE TO THIS ENGINEERING OVERSIGHT. THE OUTER RUBBER LAYER ON THE INNER EDGES OF THE FRONT TIRES STARTED TO ROLL OFF THE INNER SUB-TRAIT, THUS ALLOWING AN UNCONTROLLABLE LATERAL SHIFT IN THE CAR'S VECTOR/DIRECTION. RIGHT AND LEFT INNER SIDEWALL SECTION OF BOTH FRONT TIRES WERE CLEARLY FRICTION-CUT OR RUBBED CLEAN THROUGH FROM CONTACT WITH THE BOTTOM OF THE SPRING PAD ON THE LOWER END OF THE STRUT ASSEMBLY. THE PACKAGING TOLERANCE COMPLIED WITH THE FACTORY TIRE CHOICE HAS CLOSED THIS REQUIRED SPACE TO AN UNSAFE DIMENSION AND WITH TIME, BOUND TO AN EMINENT PRE-MATURE COMPONENT FAILURE. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE PONTIAC DEALER , STILL UNDER WARRANTY, AND WE WERE TOLD THIS WAS TIRE WEAR AND NOT COVERED UNDER WARRANTY. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME , AND AM LOOKING FORWARD TO YOUR REPLY. AK

NHTSA ODI #10191139

Mileage unknown · May 6, 2007
Suspension

HAVE 04 GTO AND HEARD ABOUT THE FRONT TIRES (INSIDE) RUBBING ON THE STRUTS (5/5/07)...READ INTERNET ARTICLES ABOUT TIRE FAILURES AND THE ONE ACCIDENT IN CLEVELAND. I CHECKED THE CONDITION (5/5/07) ON MY CAR BY REMOVING BOTH FRONT WHEELS AND DISCOVERED SERIOUS TIRE DAMAGE AND RUB MARKS ON THE STRUTS..I HAVE "GROUNDED" THE CAR DUE…

Read full complaint

HAVE 04 GTO AND HEARD ABOUT THE FRONT TIRES (INSIDE) RUBBING ON THE STRUTS (5/5/07)...READ INTERNET ARTICLES ABOUT TIRE FAILURES AND THE ONE ACCIDENT IN CLEVELAND. I CHECKED THE CONDITION (5/5/07) ON MY CAR BY REMOVING BOTH FRONT WHEELS AND DISCOVERED SERIOUS TIRE DAMAGE AND RUB MARKS ON THE STRUTS..I HAVE "GROUNDED" THE CAR DUE THE THIS CONDITION, PENDING INFORMATION ON HOW TO CORRECT THE CONDITION AND RELATED COSTS. NEITHER GM NOR MY DEALERSHIP CONTACTED ME TO FLAG THIS SERIOUS SAFETY CONDITION.*JB

NHTSA ODI #10189914

18,000 miles · May 5, 2007
SuspensionTires

CAMPAIGN # PE07010 FRONT TIRES WERE RUBBING THE STRUT HOUSING AND WEARING PREMATURELY AND UNEVENLY. TIRES WERE REPLACED AT ~18,000 MILES AND A FRONT-END ALIGNMENT WAS PERFORMED. THE NEW TIRES ALSO RUBBED THE STRUT HOUSING AND WORE PREMATURELY AND UNEVENLY AND WERE REPLACED AFTER 10,000 MILES. SPACERS WERE PLACED BETWEEN THE…

Read full complaint

CAMPAIGN # PE07010 FRONT TIRES WERE RUBBING THE STRUT HOUSING AND WEARING PREMATURELY AND UNEVENLY. TIRES WERE REPLACED AT ~18,000 MILES AND A FRONT-END ALIGNMENT WAS PERFORMED. THE NEW TIRES ALSO RUBBED THE STRUT HOUSING AND WORE PREMATURELY AND UNEVENLY AND WERE REPLACED AFTER 10,000 MILES. SPACERS WERE PLACED BETWEEN THE WHEEL AND BRAKE ROTOR TO STOP THE TIRES FROM RUBBING THE STRUT HOUSING, BUT THE REAL PROBLEM SEEMS TO EITHER BE A DESIGN FLAW OR SUSPENSION PARTS WEARING PREMATURELY. *JB

NHTSA ODI #10189889

27,104 miles · May 5, 2007
Suspension

REFER TO CLAIM # 10116796, 2004 PONTIAC GTO TIRE CONTACT WITH SUSPENSION HAS CAUSED FRONT TIRE FAILURE WHICH IS A RISK TO HIGHWAY SAFETY. ALL TIRES AND WHEELS ARE OF ORIGINAL OEM SPEC. AFTER REPLACING FRONT TIRES ONCE THE SECOND FRONT SET BEGAN TO DETERIORATE. INITIAL DEALER VISIT TO QUESTION TIRE WEAR SAID THERE WAS NO PROBLEM.…

Read full complaint

REFER TO CLAIM # 10116796, 2004 PONTIAC GTO TIRE CONTACT WITH SUSPENSION HAS CAUSED FRONT TIRE FAILURE WHICH IS A RISK TO HIGHWAY SAFETY. ALL TIRES AND WHEELS ARE OF ORIGINAL OEM SPEC. AFTER REPLACING FRONT TIRES ONCE THE SECOND FRONT SET BEGAN TO DETERIORATE. INITIAL DEALER VISIT TO QUESTION TIRE WEAR SAID THERE WAS NO PROBLEM. (2.22.07) I PULLED TIRES AND INSPECTED MYSELF AND BROUGHT PICTURES OF CONTACT POINTS WHERE TIRES RUBBED PAINT FROM STRUTS. (3.1.07) THEY THEN SAID THEY NEEDED SPECIAL PERMISSION FROM ZONE REP TO ALIGNMENT FRONT END. THREE THOUSAND MILES LATER THE TIRE FAILED LAST NIGHT. THERE IS A CUT IN THE EDGE OF THE TIRE AND BECAUSE OF TIRE WEAR THE CORDS HAVE SEPARATED. THE CORDS TEARING FROM THE TIRE WERE CONTACTING BRAKE HOSES AND ANTI-LOCK SENSORS AND CAN RISK BRAKE FAILURE. CONTACTED PONTIAC TO FILE COMPLAINT AND THEY PROVIDED #. THEY HAVE ASKED ME TO RETURN CAR TO DEALER FOR SERVICING. ALL 4 TIRES ARE WEARING ON THE INSIDE EDGES AND WILL NEED REPLACEMENT. DEALERSHIP MADE NO RECOMMENDATION FOR TIRE REPLACEMENT? *JB

NHTSA ODI #10189882

Mileage unknown · May 5, 2007
SuspensionWheels

IN REFERENCE TO RECALL CAMPAIGN PE07010. "STRUT RUB" WEAR MARKS HAVE BEEN OBSERVED ON THE STRUT TOWERS OF MY 2004 PONTIAC GTO. THE FRONT TWO TIRES ARE RUBBING AGAINST THE STRUT TOWERS WHILE THE VEHICLE IS IN MOTION. AT APPROXIMATELY 20,000 MILES I HEARD A "POPPING" SOUND COMING FROM THE FRONT SUSPENSION ON SEVERAL DIFFERENT OCC…

Read full complaint

IN REFERENCE TO RECALL CAMPAIGN PE07010. "STRUT RUB" WEAR MARKS HAVE BEEN OBSERVED ON THE STRUT TOWERS OF MY 2004 PONTIAC GTO. THE FRONT TWO TIRES ARE RUBBING AGAINST THE STRUT TOWERS WHILE THE VEHICLE IS IN MOTION. AT APPROXIMATELY 20,000 MILES I HEARD A "POPPING" SOUND COMING FROM THE FRONT SUSPENSION ON SEVERAL DIFFERENT OCCASIONS. NOTHING WAS DONE AT THAT TIME BECAUSE THE SYMPTOM WAS NOT ABLE TO BE REPRODUCED AND NO ACTUAL PROBLEM HAD BEEN OBSERVED. AT 25,000 MILES THE ORIGINAL TIRES HAD TO BE REPLACED DUE TO UNEXPLAINED IRREGULAR WEAR. AT 45,000 MILES WHILE UPON BRAKES SERVICE CLEAR WEAR MARKS WERE OBSERVED ON THE STRUT TOWERS. ON AN IRREGULAR BASIS AT SPEED THE VEHICLE EXHIBITS ABERRANT STEERING BEHAVIOR. E.G PULLING TO THE LEFT OR RIGHT FOR NOW CLEAR REASON. THE FRONT TIRES OF THE VEHICLE ARE ABNORMALLY WORN ON THE INNER TREADS FROM HITTING THE STRUT TOWERS. THE PROPOSED REPAIR AT THIS TIME IS: 1) REPLACEMENT OF THE GAS STRUTS. 2) REPLACEMENT OF THE STOCK WHEELS WITH NARROWER WHEELS SIZED 235/18. 3) REPLACEMENT OF THE POSSIBLY FAILED STRUT BUSHINGS. *JB

NHTSA ODI #10189879

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