2000 Oldsmobile Alero recalls and problems

GM CONDUCTED A RECALL (NHTSA RECALL NUMBER 03V327) ON MODEL YEAR (MY) 2000-2001 ALERO, GRAND AM AND MALIBU VEHICLES TO REPLACE DEFECTIVE HAZARD SWITCHES THAT CAUSE THE TURN SIGNALS AND HAZARD LIGHTS TO FAIL.THE RECALL COVERED VEHICLES BUILT FROM FEBRUARY 2000 THROUGH MAY 2001 (DEPENDING ON MODEL).ODI OPENED THIS INVESTIGATION BASED ON 64 REPORTS ALLEGING TURN SIGNAL FAILURE ON MY 1999-2000 ALERO, GRAND AM AND MALIBU VEHICLES NOT COVERED UNDER THE RECALL AND BUILT PRIOR TO FEBRUARY 2000.IN DECEMBER 2004, GM WILL ISSUE A SPECIAL POLICY FOR MY 1999-2000 ALERO, GRAND AM AND MALIBU VEHICLES NOT COVERED UNDER RECALL 03V327.THE POLICY COVERS TURN SIGNAL/HAZARD FLASHER FAILURE FOR A PERIOD OF 10 YEARS OR 150,000 MILES (WHICHEVER OCCURS FIRST) TO PROVIDE A NO COST REPLACEMENT OF THE HAZARD SWITCH.GM WILL SEND LETTERS TO OWNERS STARTING DECEMBER 30, 2004.THE ACTIONS TAKEN BY THE MANUFACTURER IS SUFFICIENT TO RESOLVE THE ISSUES RAISED BY THIS INVESTIGATION.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 FUTURE ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES.

BY LETTER DATED AUGUST 27, 2003, GM NOTIFIED THE AGENCY THAT IT IS CONDUCTING A VOLUNTARY SAFETY RECALL (NHTSA RECALL NO. 03V327) INVOLVING CERTAIN MODEL YEAR (MY) 2000-2001 CHEVROLET MALIBU, OLDSMOBILE ALERO, AND PONTIAC GRAND AM.GM'S RECALL COVERS 670,740 VEHICLES MANUFACTURED BEGINNING FEBRUARY 1, 2000 THROUGH MAY 1, 2001 (ALERO AND GRAND AM) AND FEBRUARY 1, 2000 THROUGH MAY 31, 2001 (MALIBU).GM REPORTS THAT TURN SIGNAL FAILURE IS DUE TO SOLDER JOINT CRACKING IN THE HAZARD SWITCH, AND HAS IDENTIFIED RAPID TEMPERATURE TRANSITIONS OF THE HAZARD SWITCH AND THE SOLDERING PROCESS AS THE CAUSE OF CRACKING.ELECTRICAL CURRENT TO THE TURN SIGNALS FLOWS THROUGH THE HAZARD SWITCH AND AN OPEN CIRCUIT IN THE HAZARD SWITCH WILL CAUSE THE EXTERIOR TURN/HAZARD LAMPS TO BECOME INTERMITTENT OR INOPERATIVE.GM WILL REPLACE THE HAZARD SWITCH ON ALL INVOLVED VEHICLES.BASED ON GM'S SAFETY RECALL ACTION, THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED.

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 …

ODI OPENED PE02-066 TO EVALUATE THE SCOPE AND CONSEQUENCE OF ENGINE POWER-LOSS DUE TO FUEL STARVATION INDUCED BY IN-TANK MODULAR FUEL PUMP STRAINER RESTRICTION.THE SUBJECT PUMPS USE AN EXTERNAL ?SOCK? STRAINER TO FILTER FUEL FLOWING TO THE PUMP INLET.THIS FILTER CAN SOMETIMES BECOME CLOGGED, RESULTING IN A REDUCED FLOW OF FUEL TO THE ENGINE.GM HAS SUBSEQUENTLY MODIFIED THE STRAINERS TO REDUCE THIS RESTRICTION.ANALYSIS OF THE ODI COMPLAINT DATABASE SHOWS THAT DESPITE THESE RESTRICTIONS, THE SUBJECT VEHICLES STALL AT A RATE THAT IS COMPARABLE TO THOSE OF MANY PEER VEHICLES.ADDITIONALLY, NONE OF THE RELEVANT WARRANTY REPAIR RATES EXCEED 1% AT 36 MONTHS OF EXPOSURE.ONE RELATED CRASH INVOLVES A STALLED VEHICLE THAT WAS REAR-ENDED ON THE ROADWAY, WHILE THE REMAINDER INVOLVED MINOR COLLISIONS OR SCRAPES.THE SOLE INJURY CONSISTED OF BRUISING FROM A LOW SPEED FRONTAL CRASH. GIVEN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, FURTHER EXPENDITURE OF AGENCY RESOURCES IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN THIS MATTER.THE PRELIMINARY EVALUATION IS THEREFORE CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT NO SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT EXISTS.THE AGENCY WILL TAKE FURTHER ACTION IN THE FUTURE IF WARRANTED.

There is no summary currently available