2000 Chevrolet S10 problems

What is wrong

Vehicle description: light duty pickup trucks and sport utility vehicles. Some of these vehicles were built with incorrect payload information on the vehicle certification label. The payload shown on the label is greater than the maximum validated payload. If the vehicle were loaded to the incorrectly labeled payload, it may not ride and handle in the manner that the driver expects.

Risk

This could result in a loss of control of the vehicle or an inability to stop the vehicle within expected stopping distances.

Remedy

Owners will be sent a new label for installation on the driver's door of the vehicle.

Recall number 00V258001 · Recall details

What is wrong

Vehicle description: passenger vehicles, light duty trucks, sport utility vehicles, and mini vans equipped with trw seat belt buckle assemblies. The buckle base of these seat belt assemblies were not properly heat treated and therefore do not pass the load bearing requirement of federal motor vehicle safety standard no. 209, "seat belt assemblies."

Risk

In the event of a vehicle crash, the occupant may not be properly restrained.

Remedy

Dealers will inspect the vehicle's safety belt buckle assembly date codes and, if necessary, will replace any safety belt buckle assembly.

Recall number 00V228003 · Recall details

What is wrong

Vehicle description: light duty pickup trucks equipped with 4-wheel disc brakes. Some of these vehicles have an antilock brake system (ABS) motor containing an out-of-specification spring clip. This clip could allow the motor bearing to become misaligned. If misalignment occurs, eventually the ABS would be non-functional.

Risk

The base brakes would remain fully functional, but the dynamic rear proportioning (drp) system, which optimizes front to rear brake balance, would become inoperative.

Remedy

Dealers will replace the brake pressure module valve assembly.

Recall number 00V055000 · Recall details

What is wrong

Vehicle description: s -trucks equipped with 2 wheel drive. These vehicles may have had the right-hand antilock brake system (ABS) module feed pipe and/or brake crossover pipe tube nuts tightened without seating the pipe-flared-ends enough to withstand normal assembly and vehicle inputs without partially unseating. This does not comply with requirements of fmvss no. 105, "hydraulic service brake normal, emergency, and park braking performance."

Risk

If this occurred, the seating seal could be broken during vehicle assembly, or from early road inputs or brake fluid cycling, and a leak could occur increasing the brake stopping distance.

Remedy

Dealers will inspect the brake pipe union for signs of brake fluid, and if necessary, install a new brake pipe union.

Recall number 99V220000 · Recall details

General motors is conducting a special policy program for 903,464 owners of 2000 - 2003 model s/t vehicles through which owners may, at their option, either (1) periodically inspect the tailgate support cables installed in their vehicle and have the cables replaced if the cable coating exhibits any indications of damage or deterioration or (2) request that the tailgate support cables be replaced free of charge. Gm will honor all requests by owners who opt for replacement without question regardless of the condition or appearance of the cables. Gm has agreed to mail reminder notifications to owners every two years until the tailgate support cables have been replaced or until the vehicle is 12 years old.odi's investigation indicates that a significant majority of the reported complaints (87%) and injuries (94%) have occurred in my 2000 - 2003 s/t vehicles.

EA05008

Odi is upgrading rq04-012 and opening an ea to investigate the tailgate support cables installed in 1998 - 2004 model year sonoma and s10 model vehicles.general motors is conducting recall campaign 04v‑129 to replace the tailgate support cables originally installed in certain model year 2000-2004 sierras and silverados and certain model year 2002-2004 avalanches and escalade exts (c/k models).general motors has advised odithat the tailgate support cables installed in the subject vehicles were fabricated using identical or similar sheathing material as the recalled vehicles.however,general motors has advised odi that sonoma and s-10 vehicles differ from c/k models in several ways: the vehicle height is lower; the tailgate displacement (drop) when not supported by the cables is smaller and the tailgate comes to rest at a less severe tip angle when not supported by the cables; the tailgate mass is smaller; and the size, payload, and usage characteristcis are less demanding than c/k model vehicles.gm also stated that sonoma and s-10 warranty claim information indicates a lower claim count and a lower claim rate than recalled c/k models.notwithstanding the above information, odi has received an additional 73 non-injury complaints and 10 injury complaints on the subject vehicles during rq04-012 (since november 2004 to date), which justifies opening an engineering analysis to further investigate this issue.

RQ04012

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 the federal safety agency that no safety-related defect exists.the agency will take further action in the future if warranted.

PE02066