ODOMETER DISPLAY IS VISIBLE WHEN FIRST STARTING CAR. AS SOON AS YOU BEGIN TO DRIVE, THE ODOMETER READING BEGINS TO FLICKER. DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE GIVING AN ACCURATE READING EITHER. SHOP STATED THAT NEW DASH ASSEMBLY WOULD HAVE TO BE INSTALLED TO CORRECT ISSUE SINCE ACCESS TO WIRING WAS NOT POSSIBLE.
2001 Pontiac Sunfire
Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations
Similar to other model years
Owner complaints for the 2001 Pontiac Sunfire do not stand out strongly from the model-year median of 77.
About this comparison →How this year compares
Owner complaints by model year
Compare all Sunfire 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
29 reports with mileage · 37 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 21 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Engine And Engine Cooling. Review the 12 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Service Brakes, Hydraulic. Review the 8 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
What owners actually said
66 reports2001 PONTIAC - AIRBAG DEPLOYMENT CAUSES TOTAL WRECK JUNE 28, 2005, CA. 1130 - ON A RIGHT-ANGLE TURN AT LESS THAN 5 MPH INTO A NARROW LANE IN A PARKING AREA AT CONROE REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER , CONROE, TX, AT ABOUT 1130 JUNE 28, THE LEFT REAR WHEEL OF MY 2001 PONTIAC SUNFIRE WENT UP ONTO A 3-TO-4-INCH-HIGH CONCRETE MEDIAN. WHEN…
Read full complaint
2001 PONTIAC - AIRBAG DEPLOYMENT CAUSES TOTAL WRECK JUNE 28, 2005, CA. 1130 - ON A RIGHT-ANGLE TURN AT LESS THAN 5 MPH INTO A NARROW LANE IN A PARKING AREA AT CONROE REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER , CONROE, TX, AT ABOUT 1130 JUNE 28, THE LEFT REAR WHEEL OF MY 2001 PONTIAC SUNFIRE WENT UP ONTO A 3-TO-4-INCH-HIGH CONCRETE MEDIAN. WHEN I ATTEMPTED TO STEER OFF THE MEDIAN, THE RESULTING SLIGHT DROP CAUSED MY AIRBAGS TO DEPLOY. THIS DEPLOYMENT CAUSED BRUISES ON BOTH FOREARMS, BRUISED MY LOWER RIGHT RIBCAGE AND FORCED BOTH HANDS BACK OFF THE WHEEL, PREVENTING ME FROM STEERING THE CAR. FURTHERMORE, THE DEPLOYMENT FORCED MY LEGS AWAY FROM THE FOOT CONTROLS. THE DEPLOYING AIRBAG KNOCKED MY SPECTACLES UP ONTO MY FOREHEAD, THE LEFT TEMPLE CAUSING A SMALL CUT AND BENDING THE SPECTACLES SO THEY COULD NOT BE WORN AND HAD TO BE REPAIRED LATER. AS A RESULT OF THIS AIRBAG DEPLOYMENT I WAS TOTALLY UNABLE TO CONTROL DIRECTION OR SPEED. THE CAR LUNGED AT ABOUT A 30-DEGREE ANGLE TO THE RIGHT FOR A DISTANCE OF ABOUT 12 FEET AND SMASHED INTO A PILLAR, CAUSING THE VEHICLE TO SUSTAIN SEVERE DAMAGE TO THE FRONT END, SMASHING THE BUMPER AND THE RADIATOR AND CRACKING THE RIGHT PART OF THE WINDSHIELD. PERSONNEL FROM THE HOSPITAL, THE CONROE POLICE DEPARTMENT, AND THE LOCAL EMS WERE ON THE SCENE IMMEDIATELY. THE CONROE POLICE ASSIGNED A CASE NUMBER 05064218 TO THE ACCIDENT. I AM APPALLED TO THINK THAT THIS SAME ACCIDENT WHICH DESTROYED MY VEHICLE AND HURT ME WITHIN A FEW FEET AT EXTREMELY LOW SPEED MIGHT HAVE HAPPENED AT A BUMP IN THE ROAD AT HIGHWAY SPEED. HAD THE AIRBAGS NOT DEPLOYED THERE WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN AN ACCIDENT, AS I WOULD HAVE BEEN ABLE TO OPERATE MY VEHICLE PROPERLY. THIS EXPERIENCE HAS BEEN VERY COSTLY IN TERMS OF VEHICLE REPLACEMENT AND PERSONAL PAIN. OBVIOUSLY, MORE THOUGHT HAS TO BE GIVEN TO THE SUBJECT OF AIRBAGS AND SAFETY. A ONE-SIZE-FITS-ALL MENTALITY DOES NOT WORK. *JB
2001 PONTIAC SUNFIRE EXPERIENCING VARIOUS PROBLEMS.***NO ANSWER REQUIRED***. *MR THE REAR SPRINGS INOPERATIVE. 6 MONTHS AFTER THE VEHICEL WAS PURCHASED THE TIRE TREAD WERE BADLY WORN. ONE OF THE WHEELS RIMS WERE ALSO BENT. *NM
WHILE DRIVING AT APPROXIMATELY 30 MPH DRIVER HIT A BUMP IN THE ROAD. INADVERTENTLY THE AIR BAGS DEPLOYED, BREAKING THE WINDSHIELD, AND CAUSING DAMAGE TO THE DASHBOARD. OWNER DROVE THE VEHICLE TO RESIDENCE. *AK
THE TRACTION LIGHT ILLUMINATED AND THEN THE VEHICLE SHUT OFF COMPLETELY. THE VEHICLE HAS BEEN TAKEN IN FOR SERVICE, BUT THE PROBLEM COULD NOT BE DUPLICATED. *JB
NHTSA RECALL CAMPAIGN #04V036000; PONTIAC ISSUED AN IGNITION SWITCH RECALL. THIS VEHICLE WAS NOT INCLUDED IN THE RECALL DUE TO VIN ALTHOUGH THE CONSUMER EXPERIENCED THE SAME PROBLEM AS THOSE VEHICLE'S THAT CAUSED THE WINDSHIELD TO CRACK AND 2700 HUNDRED DOLLARS WORTH OF DAMAGE TO THE VEHICLE. THE REAR SEAT BELTS DID NOT WORK. …
Read full complaint
NHTSA RECALL CAMPAIGN #04V036000; PONTIAC ISSUED AN IGNITION SWITCH RECALL. THIS VEHICLE WAS NOT INCLUDED IN THE RECALL DUE TO VIN ALTHOUGH THE CONSUMER EXPERIENCED THE SAME PROBLEM AS THOSE VEHICLE'S THAT CAUSED THE WINDSHIELD TO CRACK AND 2700 HUNDRED DOLLARS WORTH OF DAMAGE TO THE VEHICLE. THE REAR SEAT BELTS DID NOT WORK. *SC *JB
THE ENGINE LIGHT APPEARED ON THE DASHBOARD AND REMAINED ON. CONSUMER DROVE VEHICLE TO DEALER FOR INSPECTION, AND MECHANIC DETERMINED THAT THE HEAD GASKET NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. *AK
CONTINUATION OF ODI 10093259: REPEATED INAPPROPRIATE ACTIVATION OF PASS LOCK 2 ANTI-THEFT SYSTEM. THE PASS LOCK ACTIVATES WITHOUT WARNING RESULTING IN STRANDING OF MOTORIST. GM DENIES DEFECT IN PASS LOCK. HOWEVER, DEALER SERVICE MANAGER STATES THAT, "I KNOW THAT IT WILL HAPPEN SOMEDAY, THAT I'LL GO TO START MY (GM PRODUCT) A…
Read full complaint
CONTINUATION OF ODI 10093259: REPEATED INAPPROPRIATE ACTIVATION OF PASS LOCK 2 ANTI-THEFT SYSTEM. THE PASS LOCK ACTIVATES WITHOUT WARNING RESULTING IN STRANDING OF MOTORIST. GM DENIES DEFECT IN PASS LOCK. HOWEVER, DEALER SERVICE MANAGER STATES THAT, "I KNOW THAT IT WILL HAPPEN SOMEDAY, THAT I'LL GO TO START MY (GM PRODUCT) AND THE PASSLOCK WON'T LET ME." THE SERVICE MANAGER STATED THAT "IT'S NOT A MATTER OF IF, IT'S A MATTER OF WHEN" (THE DEFECT OCCURS). THE DLR REFERS TO THE PROBLEMS WITH THE SYSTEM AS "AN ACCEPTABLE PRICE TO PAY FOR HAVING A THEFT PREVENTION SYSTEM. INAPPROPRIATE ACTIVATION OF THE PASSLOCK SYSTEM IS LIKELY TO RESULT IN INCIDENTAL INJURIES TO STRANDED MOTORISTS IF THE INCIDENT OCCURS IN A HIGH CRIME AREA. OWNERS OF VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH PASSLOCK HAVE NO WARNING OF PENDING FAILURES WHICH ARE EXPENSIVE TO REPAIR. IF THE DEFECT OCCURS WHILE TRAVELING FAR FROM ONE'S HOME, THE MOTORIST WOULD BE STRANDED, QUITE POSSIBLY WITHOUT THE MEANS TO OBTAIN REPAIRS TO CONTINUE THEIR JOURNEY. GM SERVICE REPS BLAME THE FAILURES ON "WEAR AND TEAR" OF THE IGNITION SWITCH. HOWEVER, THIS VEHICLE HAS BEEN SUBJECT TO RECALL FOR OVERVOLTAGE DAMAGE TO THE SWITCH. SUCH OVERVOLTAGES ARE ALSO LIKELY TO DAMAGE COMPONENTS OF THE PASSLOCK SYSTEM (I.E. THE HALL EFFECT SENSOR) WITHIN THE IGNITION SWITCH.*AK
LOCK ANTI-THEFT SYSTEM INTERMITTENTLY DISABLES CAR. SOMETIMES THE SYSTEM WILL RESET ITSELF. THE LAST TIME IT WOULD NOT RESET.*AK
AIRBAGS DID NOT DEPLOY IN A FRONT-END COLLISION. THE VEHICLE WAS TOTALED. POLICE OFFICERS AND EMTS WERE SURPRISED AND QUESTIONED WEATHER BAGS WERE DEFECTIVE. DRIVER RECEIVED SMALL SCRAPE TO FOREHEAD WHICH COULD HAVE BEEN PREVENTED HAD AIRBAGS WORKED. DRIVER AND THREE PASSENGERS WERE WEARING SEATBELTS, SO ONLY MINOR BRUISES …
Read full complaint
AIRBAGS DID NOT DEPLOY IN A FRONT-END COLLISION. THE VEHICLE WAS TOTALED. POLICE OFFICERS AND EMTS WERE SURPRISED AND QUESTIONED WEATHER BAGS WERE DEFECTIVE. DRIVER RECEIVED SMALL SCRAPE TO FOREHEAD WHICH COULD HAVE BEEN PREVENTED HAD AIRBAGS WORKED. DRIVER AND THREE PASSENGERS WERE WEARING SEATBELTS, SO ONLY MINOR BRUISES WERE SUSTAINED.
Official recalls
104V036000 · Electrical System:ignition:switch
Jan 27, 2004
ON CERTAIN PASSENGER VEHICLES. IF THE ENGINE FAILS TO START AND THE DRIVER HOLDS THE KEY IN THE "START" POSITION FOR AN EXTENDED PERIOD, HIGH CURRENT FLOWS THROUGH THE IGNITION SWITCH, AND SOMETIMES PRODUCES ENOUGH HEAT TO MELT INTERNAL SWITCH PARTS.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: IF THE SWITCH IS DAMAGED, A FIRE COULD OCCUR IN THE STEERING COLUMN, EVEN WITH THE ENGINE OFF AND THE KEY REMOVED. THE FIRE COULD SPREAD TO THE INTERIOR OF THE CAR, WHICH COULD INJURE OCCUPANTS OR CAUSE DAMAGE TO ADJOINING STRUCTURES.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL INSTALL A RELAY KIT IN THESE VEHICLES TO PREVENT HIGH CURRENT FROM FLOWING THROUGH THE IGNITION SWITCH, AND CHECK THAT YOUR CAR WILL START WITH A PROPERLY CHARGED BATTERY AND, IF NECESSARY, REPLACE THE IGNITION SWITCH. OWNER NOTIFICATION WILL BEGIN ON MARCH 1, 2004. OWNERS WHO TAKE THEIR VEHICLES TO AN AUTHORIZED DEALER ON AN AGREED UPON SERVICE DATE AND DO NOT RECEIVE THE FREE REMEDY WITHIN A REASONABLE TIME SHOULD CONTACT CHEVROLET AT 1-800-630-2438, PONTIAC AT 1-800-620-7668, BUICK AT 1-866-608-8080, OR OLDSMOBILE AT 1-800-630-6537. CUSTOMERS CAN ALSO CHECK THEIR VEHICLE ONLINE BY GOING TO WWW.MYGMLINK.COM AND ENTERING THE VEHICLE'S IDENTIFICATION NUMBER.
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
2EA02028 · Erratic Fuel Gauge
Opened Sep 30, 2002 · Closed Dec 30, 2003
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Fuel System, Gasoline; Fuel System, Other:storage:fuel Gauge System
ODI OPENED EA 02-028 TO REVIEW COMPLAINTS OF CONSUMERS REPORTING THAT THEIR FUEL GAUGE WAS INCORRECTLY DISPLAYING THE AMOUNT OF FUEL IN THE GAS TANK.THE FUEL GAUGE RECEIVES AN ELECTRICAL SIGNAL FROM A FUEL TANK SENDING SENSOR CIRCUIT CARD.A FLOAT ARM IN THE TANK MOVES ELECTRICAL CONTACTS THAT RUB AGAINST THE CARD AS THE LEVEL OF FUEL RISES AND FALLS.DISRUPTION OF THE ELECTRICAL SIGNAL (SUCH AS CAUSED BY CORROSION OF THE CIRCUIT CARD) WILL CAUSE INCORRECT READINGS TO REGISTER ON THE FUEL GAUGE.GM REPORTED IN THEIR RESPONSE TO ODI DATED JANUARY 13, 2003 THAT THE PRIMARY CAUSE OF ERRATIC FUEL GAUGE OPERATION IS EXCESS ELEMENTAL SULFUR IN FUEL.GM REPORTED THAT ABNORMAL LEVELS OF SULFUR SPORADICALLY OCCURRED IN CERTAIN PARTS OF CANADA AND THE U.S. RESULTING IN REPORTS OF FUEL GAUGE MALFUNCTION.GM MODIFIED THE SENDING SENSOR FOR VEHICLES BUILT AFTER OCTOBER 2000.IT MADE A SECOND SENSOR MODIFICATION FOR VEHICLES BUILT AFTER JANUARY 2003.GM ALSO ISSUED A CUSTOMER SATISFACTION CAMPAIGN (GM NUMBER 00101) IN DECEMBER 2000 FOR U.S. CUSTOMERS IN THE STATE OF MAINE AND ISSUED SEVERAL SERVICE BULLETINS INFORMING DEALERS OF THE AVAILABILITY OF SENSORS WITH IMPROVED CORROSION RESISTANCE.THE COMPLAINT TREND INDICATES THAT COMPLAINTS PEAKED IN LATE 2000 TO EARLY 2001.WARRANTY CLAIMS DECLINED SINCE PEAKING IN APRIL 2002.BASED ON THE NUMBER OF COMPLAINTS AND THE INDICATION OF A DECLINING TREND, FURTHER USE OF AGENCY RESOURCES DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE WARRANTED.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.
Additional source detail variants (2)
Fuel System, Gasoline
ODI OPENED EA 02-028 TO REVIEW COMPLAINTS OF CONSUMERS REPORTING THAT THEIR FUEL GAUGE WAS INCORRECTLY DISPLAYING THE AMOUNT OF FUEL IN THE GAS TANK.THE FUEL GAUGE RECEIVES AN ELECTRICAL SIGNAL FROM A FUEL TANK SENDING SENSOR CIRCUIT CARD.A FLOAT ARM IN THE TANK MOVES ELECTRICAL CONTACTS THAT RUB AGAINST THE CARD AS THE LEVEL OF FUEL RISES AND FALLS.DISRUPTION OF THE ELECTRICAL SIGNAL (SUCH AS CAUSED BY CORROSION OF THE CIRCUIT CARD) WILL CAUSE INCORRECT READINGS TO REGISTER ON THE FUEL GAUGE.GM REPORTED IN THEIR RESPONSE TO ODI DATED JANUARY 13, 2003 THAT THE PRIMARY CAUSE OF ERRATIC FUEL GAUGE OPERATION IS EXCESS ELEMENTAL SULFUR IN FUEL.GM REPORTED THAT ABNORMAL LEVELS OF SULFUR SPORADICALLY OCCURRED IN CERTAIN PARTS OF CANADA AND THE U.S. RESULTING IN REPORTS OF FUEL GAUGE MALFUNCTION.GM MODIFIED THE SENDING SENSOR FOR VEHICLES BUILT AFTER OCTOBER 2000.IT MADE A SECOND SENSOR MODIFICATION FOR VEHICLES BUILT AFTER JANUARY 2003.GM ALSO ISSUED A CUSTOMER SATISFACTION CAMPAIGN (GM NUMBER 00101) IN DECEMBER 2000 FOR U.S. CUSTOMERS IN THE STATE OF MAINE AND ISSUED SEVERAL SERVICE BULLETINS INFORMING DEALERS OF THE AVAILABILITY OF SENSORS WITH IMPROVED CORROSION RESISTANCE.THE COMPLAINT TREND INDICATES THAT COMPLAINTS PEAKED IN LATE 2000 TO EARLY 2001.WARRANTY CLAIMS DECLINED SINCE PEAKING IN APRIL 2002.BASED ON THE NUMBER OF COMPLAINTS AND THE INDICATION OF A DECLINING TREND, FURTHER USE OF AGENCY RESOURCES DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE WARRANTED.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.
Fuel System, Other:storage:fuel Gauge System
ODI OPENED EA 02-028 TO REVIEW COMPLAINTS OF CONSUMERS REPORTING THAT THEIR FUEL GAUGE WAS INCORRECTLY DISPLAYING THE AMOUNT OF FUEL IN THE GAS TANK.THE FUEL GAUGE RECEIVES AN ELECTRICAL SIGNAL FROM A FUEL TANK SENDING SENSOR CIRCUIT CARD.A FLOAT ARM IN THE TANK MOVES ELECTRICAL CONTACTS THAT RUB AGAINST THE CARD AS THE LEVEL OF FUEL RISES AND FALLS.DISRUPTION OF THE ELECTRICAL SIGNAL (SUCH AS CAUSED BY CORROSION OF THE CIRCUIT CARD) WILL CAUSE INCORRECT READINGS TO REGISTER ON THE FUEL GAUGE.GM REPORTED IN THEIR RESPONSE TO ODI DATED JANUARY 13, 2003 THAT THE PRIMARY CAUSE OF ERRATIC FUEL GAUGE OPERATION IS EXCESS ELEMENTAL SULFUR IN FUEL.GM REPORTED THAT ABNORMAL LEVELS OF SULFUR SPORADICALLY OCCURRED IN CERTAIN PARTS OF CANADA AND THE U.S. RESULTING IN REPORTS OF FUEL GAUGE MALFUNCTION.GM MODIFIED THE SENDING SENSOR FOR VEHICLES BUILT AFTER OCTOBER 2000.IT MADE A SECOND SENSOR MODIFICATION FOR VEHICLES BUILT AFTER JANUARY 2003.GM ALSO ISSUED A CUSTOMER SATISFACTION CAMPAIGN (GM NUMBER 00101) IN DECEMBER 2000 FOR U.S. CUSTOMERS IN THE STATE OF MAINE AND ISSUED SEVERAL SERVICE BULLETINS INFORMING DEALERS OF THE AVAILABILITY OF SENSORS WITH IMPROVED CORROSION RESISTANCE.THE COMPLAINT TREND INDICATES THAT COMPLAINTS PEAKED IN LATE 2000 TO EARLY 2001.WARRANTY CLAIMS DECLINED SINCE PEAKING IN APRIL 2002.BASED ON THE NUMBER OF COMPLAINTS AND THE INDICATION OF A DECLINING TREND, FURTHER USE OF AGENCY RESOURCES DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE WARRANTED.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.
SQ01002 · Erratic Fuel Gauge
Opened Jan 26, 2001 · Closed Sep 30, 2002
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Vehicle Speed Control:linkages
There is no summary currently available
Illustration