The ABS and Brake lights illuminate as per GM recall 05v379000. This occurs each time the vehicle is driven. I purchased this vehicle on 12/6/2023 from Kyle's Kars which is a used car dealership in Slatington, PA. A warranty was not offered due to the age, however I did purchase a warranty from Car Shield. This repair would not fall under the warranty guidelines.
2001 Chevrolet Suburban brakes problems
178 complaints (40% of all complaints for this car). Typical mileage when it fails: 69,000. 10 crashes reported.
- owner complaints
- 178
- of this car's complaints
- 40%
- typical mileage
- 69,000
- crashes
- 10
- recalls
- 1
Which part fails
- Antilock/traction control/electronic limited slip40
- Antilock/traction control/electronic limited slip: control unit/module12
- Antilock: control unit/module6
- Foundation components: disc: rotor5
- Foundation components: disc: pads4
- Conventional4
- Power assist3
- Foundation components3
At what mileage
Complaints by mileage at the time of the problem.
Chevrolet Suburban brakes problems in other years
Specific symptoms reported on the 2001 Chevrolet Suburban brakes
Phrases found in the owners' own descriptions, so one complaint can mention several symptoms.
Related recalls
Service brakes, hydraulic: antilock/traction control/electronic limited slip
- What is wrong
- Certain pickup trucks and sport utility vehicles may experience unwanted antilock brake system (ABS) activation. This condition is more likely to occur in environmentally corrosive areas. This recall will be launched in the "salt belt" states of connecticut, delaware, illinois, indiana, iowa, maryland, massachusetts, maine, michigan, minnesota, missouri, new hampshire, new jersey, new york, ohio, pennsylvania, rhode island, vermont, west virginia, wisconsin and the district of columbia only.
- Risk
- This can cause increased stopping distances during low-speed brake applications, which could result in a crash.
- Remedy
- Dealers are to remove the wheel speed sensor and thoroughly clean the wheel speed sensor mounting surface on the bearing, apply rust inhibitor to the cleaned surface, grease the mounting surface, reinstall the wheel speed sensor, and check the peak-to-peak output voltage to ensure the wheel speed signal is within specifications. The recall began september 22, 2005. Owners may contact chevrolet at 1‑800‑630‑2438 or gmc at 1‑866‑996‑9463.
Recall number 05V379000 · Recall details
Related investigations
Brake line corrosion failure
On January 11, 2011, ODI opened EA11-001 to investigate allegations of premature brake line corrosion failure in model year (MY) 1999 through 2003 General Motors (GM) full-size pickup trucks and sport utility vehicles sold or registered in the following region of the United States that the federal safety agency has viewed as salt states for investigations of corrosion related issues:Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, West Virginia and Wisconsin.The subject vehicles represent the first five MY's of GM's GMT800 platform production, of which approximately 2,038,504 vehicles were sold in salt states (the subject vehicles).The GMT800 platform includes the following vehicles:1999-2007 Chevrolet Silverado and GMC Sierra 1500, 2500 and 3500 series pick-up trucks; 2000-2006 Chevrolet Suburban, Chevrolet Tahoe and GMC Yukon sport utility vehicles; and 2002-2006 Cadillac Escalade and Chevrolet Avalanche sport-utility vehicles.General Motors produced a total of approximately 10,427,062 GMT800 vehicles for sales in the United States, including almost 5 million that were sold in salt states.Although there are over 60 different brake pipe routing configuration used in GMT800 vehicles, with the exception of the rear crossover pipes in MY 200x-2007 vehicles that changed from rear disc to drum brakes, all of the vehicles use brake pipes from the same supplier with a common double-wall, brazed steel pipe design with a combination of hot dip Zinc-Aluminum corrosion protection coating and Aluminum paint outer layer known in the industry as AlGal (ASTM-B750). ODI analysis of field data regarding GMT800 vehicles identified a total of 3,645 complaints of brake pipe corrosion failures, including 107 alleging crashes, and 40 injuries.Though only 20% of total GMT800 production, due to age and region the subject vehicles account for a disproportionate share of the failure experience; with 2,702 of the complaints (75%), 88 of the crashes (82%) and 20 of the injuries (50%) reported in those vehicles.Analysis of the complaints showed strong correlations to vehicle age and region.For vehicles with less than 8 years of service, the complaint rates were minimal for all regions.In the salt states the failure rates begin to climb as the vehicles advance in age, particularly in the Northeast corner of the United States.The complaint rates in the salt states go from less than 0.1 incident per thousand vehicles (IPTV) at 7 years in service to over 1.0 IPTV after the 12th year of service for the subject pickup trucks and utility vehicles.Most of the failures reported to ODI occurred in vehicles with more than 10 years in service.ODI?s investigation did not identify any specific defect conditions that were causing or contributing to the brake pipe failures.Nor did the analysis isolate the problem to any subject vehicle sub-populations when analyzed by vehicle type or production range.The investigation found that vehicles experiencing brake pipe corrosion failures were likely to have general patterns of excessive corrosion on the majority of the brake pipe assembly and appear to be occurring due to expected wear out for the brake pipe coating material used in the subject vehicles and the environmental conditions in severe corrosion states.A safety-related defect has not been identified at this time.Accordingly, this investigation is closed.The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by the federal safety agency that a safety-related defect does not exist.The agency will monitor t
EA11001
Brake line corrosion failure
The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) received Defect Petition DP10-003 on March 2, 2010, requesting the investigation of model year (MY) 2003 Chevrolet Silverado 2500HD 4WD pickup trucks for corrosion failures of the vehicle brake lines.DP10-003 was granted and on March 30, 2010, Preliminary Evaluation PE10-010 was opened on more than six million model year 1999 through 2003 light trucks and sport utility vehicles manufactured and sold by General Motors Corporation (GM).On July 2, 2010, ODI received GM's response to an information request, which included GM's assessment of the frequency and safety consequences of the alleged defect. GM stated that:(1) the brake system of the subject vehicles is split front/rear and should a brake pipe suddenly fail for any reason, the affected vehicle would be capable of stopping with the pressure supplied by the remaining circuit; (2) the subject vehicles were designed to meet the hydraulic circuit partial failure requirements of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards 105 and 135, Light Vehicle Brake Systems; and (3) should a brake fluid leak occur for any reason, the brake system malfunction indicator lamp (MIL) would illuminate and warn the driver before the brake fluid level was low enough to cause a loss of line pressure.ODI's and GM's analysis indicates that 85 percent of the complaints occurred on vehicles used primarily in States that use salt on the roads during Winter months (Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, West Virginia and Wisconsin).Overall the complaint rates per 100,000 vehicles for Salt Belt States is 43.0 and Non-Salt Belt is 3.0.In approximately 25 percent of the complaints the brake pipe failure occurred suddenly, with no warning (i.e., no MIL, Brake Fluid Loss Warning), and resulted in extended stopping distances.In 30 of these the increase in stopping distance that resulted was a factor in the crash and in 10 others the vehicle was intentionally steered off the road or into another lane of travel in order to avoid a crash.This investigation has been upgraded to an Engineering Analysis (EA11-001) for subject vehicles sold or currently registered in Salt Belt States to further assess the scope, frequency and safety risks associated with sudden failures of corroded brake pipes that can result in decreased brake effectiveness. ODI will continue to gather information on subject vehicles outside the Salt Belt as well.
PE10010
Parking brake failure
Odi's review of complaint data received since the close of ea04-011 revealed no indication that the investigation should be re-opened.more details can be found in the federal register notice enclosed in the dp05-009 public file.odi reserves the right to reopen the investigation in the future should conditions warrant.
DP05009
Unwanted low-speed ABS activation
In a letter dated august 29, 2005, gm notified odi that it was recalling certain model year 1999 through 2002 c/k pickup trucks and sport utility vehicles to correct a problem with anti-lock brake system (ABS) wheel speed sensor corrosion that may result in unwanted ABS activation and extended stopping distances during low-speed braking (recall 05v‑379).gm's recall covers approximately 804,000 vehicles currently registered in the following 14 salt-belt states:connecticut, illinois, indiana, massachusetts, maine, michigan, new hampshire, new jersey, new york, ohio, pennsylvania, rhode island, vermont, and west virginia.the recall procedure will involve removing the sensor, cleaning the mounting surface, applying a rust inhibitor (zinc-x) to the surface, and reinstalling the sensor.if necessary, the sensor will be replaced. The population and failure report data given in this resume are for the full region that has been considered by odi as the salt-belt.that includes delaware, iowa, maryland, minnesota, missouri, wisconsin and the district of columbia in addition to the 14 states included in 05v‑379.the states covered by gm's recall have the highest incident rates for the subject condition, accounting for 91% of the incidents, but only 24% of subject vehicle sales in the united states.odi's analysis determined that 840 of the complaints, 244 of the crashes, and 16 of the injuries identified in this investigation occurred in those states.the resulting incident and crash rates are 96.2 and 28.0 per 100,000 vehicles respectively (note:rates are based on vehicle sales, not registered vehicles). The corresponding numbers in the excluded portions of the salt-belt are 399,000 vehicles, 81 incidents (20.3 per 100,000 vehicles), 3 crashes, and no injuries.the statistics in the remaining 30 states are 2,406,000 vehicles, 168 incidents (7.0 per 100,000 vehicles), 31 crashes, and one injury.gm and odi are continuing to monitor the problem experience in states that are not included in the recall.gm will provide odi with updated complaint, field report, and warranty data in november 2005.odi and gm will review that data and assess the appropriateness of the current scope of the recall at that time.
PE05020
Hydraulic pump failres
Gm is conducting a recall on all subject vehicles build between may 1999 and october 14, 1999.significant changes were incorporated into production in early october 1999, and vehicles built after that date have lower warranty failure rates.the complaint and warranty data appear to support the effectiveness of these changes. Gm made additional changes in november 1999, february 2000, may 2001, and february 2004.odi will continue to monitor this problem and will take further action, if warranted, in the future.for further technical details see the attached engineering analysis report.
EA04012
What 2001 Chevrolet Suburban owners say
Most recent owner complaints, unedited.
this vehicle has a non-functioning parking brake. There was a recall in 2004 for 880,000 trucks and suv's. I have taken it to my garage twice but they cannot fix this problem because it is not fixable
Tl* the contact owns a 2001 chevrolet suburban. The contact stated that while driving behind his father's vehicle, they had approached a stop and attempted to depress the brake pedal. As his foot was on the pedal, the contact could hear the ABS making an abnormal noise as the brake pedal failed to operate as needed. Due to the failure, the contact hit the back of his father's vehicle without warning. Due to the low impact of the crash, the airbags did not deploy. A police report was not filed and no injuries were reported. The manufacturer was then notified of the failure and they informed him that his vehicle was not included in the federal safety agency campaign number: 05v379000(service brakes, hydraulic) and offered no further assistance. The vehicle had yet to be repaired. The failure mileage was 159,000.*dt
Fuel pump may falter or fail; fuel pump relay was non-functional, replaced it; other fuses passed testing with meter; vehicle started, would not run more than a few minutes. New fuel filter. Guy at service station banged on gas tank, and it would start then run great for a minute, then will not restart. Ordering a replacement fuel pump. Bought this vehicle in 2005 about the time of gm recall 05027. In doing online trouble-shooting today, I discovered the 2001 gm recall 05027. Have had this problem several times. Fuel filter was last changed in july 2009. Complete failure when in motion, backing out of service station onto main street (us 64 bus), just inches from lane of travel (6.14.19).what could be worse than fuel pump failure at a busy intersection during lunch hour? Grateful it didn't catch fire, or get hit. As the service attendant tried to restart it, over and over, the relay in the ecu may have failed at that time. In the interim, my husband died. I replaced relay/fuses today 9/14/19, and vehicle started, but would not stay running. Another mechanic banged on fuel tank, it ran for a while, so he advised replacing pump, which is not rocket science after viewing youtube how-to videos. With the pump failing sporadically, and responding to the vibration of being banged, it seems like faulty wiring or connection problem, or that something is loose or not fully seated anymore. Lots of folks say the chevy 1500 is widely known for fuel supply problems. Gas gauge has not been accurate ever. When full, it may show empty when turning or hitting a slight bump in the road. (track by computing mpg and mileage, to determine range). In short distances, it swings full-> empty->full. Wiring diagram shows tiny fuse labeled prime, none there. Abs indicator lights up because sensor cable at right front tire may fail on left turn, or hard right turn, yet brakes are fine.
Tl* the contact owns a 2001 chevrolet suburban. While driving at low speeds, the vehicle experienced increased stopping distance when braking. The vehicle was taken to commonwealth chevrolet (155 marston st, lawrence, ma 01841, (978) 687-3000) where it was diagnosed that the driver and passenger side wheel bearing assemblies needed to be replaced. The vehicle was repaired. The VIN was not included in the federal safety agency campaign number: 05v379000 (service brakes, hydraulic). The manufacturer was made aware of the failure. The failure mileage was 210,000.
While thankfully driving at a low speed, my brakes completely failed with no warning..peddle went to the floor, I was able to stop by shifting the trans down to 2nd then 1st. Mechanic said knew exactly what the problem was when I explained what happened after I stopped, pumped the brakes and brake fluid flowed from under the truck generally under where the driver sits. Mechanic explained that the brake line broke and is very common, and that it just started showing up a few years ago when these "c" body trucks aged. I spoke to another mechanic at a chevy dealership near my home and he said the same thing that it's very common and that gm now sells a kit for a compete brake-line system replacement because it has become so common. A few days before I had been driving at high speeds through the mountains on I-81 with a carload full of people, had this happened at that time it could have been catastrophic. Reviewing consumer complaints on your site I see this is a reoccurring compliant and I can't believe there has not been a recall on this, as there is no more important safety system on a automobile than brakes....chevy had a recall on my 98' buick for a valve cover gasket leaking that didn't come close to this potential danger.
Tl* the contact owns a 2001 chevrolet suburban. While driving approximately 5 MPH, the anti-lock brakes activated without warning, which made the vehicle hard to stop. The vehicle was not diagnosed or repaired. The VIN was not included in the federal safety agency campaign number: 05v379000 (service brakes, hydraulic). The manufacturer was not notified of the failure. The VIN was not provided. The approximate failure mileage was 190,000.
Three times I had complete brake failure. Driving two times and had just arrived at my destination third time, which was today -- surprise!!!! Had to slowly drive home, yet again, with no brakes!!!!!
Brake lines failed twice due to rust and corrosion because chevy used a inferior steel product on all trucks from 1998 to 2005. The dealer repaired my 2002 avalanche for $600.00 to replace all the brake lines. However they will not repair my 2001 suburban which has the same problems. Gm needs to re-call any vehicle or at least make a repair kit and installation at a reduced rate because this vehicle is unsafe to drive. This is not due to owner error of washing the frame during winter or winter maintenance. There is new lines that are coated to resist corosion and were used to repair my avalanche. My 2001 suburban brake lines failed in motion while in traffic applying the brake petal to stop.
I was applying the brakes on my 2001 chevrolet suburban, model 2500, as I turned into my driveway. The brakes failed to engage. This resulted in the vehicle running into the front of the garage. The brakes now appear to be working fine. The brakes have failed on previous occasions, but never to the point of allowing the vehicle to hit anything. According to the gm dealer, they can't fix the problem without a failure code in the computer. An independent service garage said the same.
Questions about the 2001 Chevrolet Suburban brakes
Does the 2001 Chevrolet Suburban have brakes problems?
Owners have filed 178 complaints about the brakes of the 2001 Chevrolet Suburban, 40% of all its complaints, more than any other problem.
At what mileage do 2001 Chevrolet Suburban brakes problems start?
The typical (median) mileage in owner complaints is 69,000 miles.
Was there a recall on the 2001 Chevrolet Suburban brakes?
Yes, 1 recall: 05V379000. Check your VIN to see if your car still needs the free repair.
What year does the Chevrolet Suburban have bad brakes?
The Chevrolet Suburban model years with the most brakes complaints are 1994 (581 complaints), 1993 (382 complaints) and 1999 (246 complaints).
Other 2001 Chevrolet Suburban problems
Fuel system 60Engine 37Transmission 33Electrical 30Steering 29Tires 28Seat belts 23Airbags 21Body 14Visibility 14Acceleration 12Suspension 11Seats 6Lights 4Wheels 2Locks 1
VIN decoder
See the problems and recalls for an exact car
Buying a used 2001 Chevrolet Suburban?
Check the exact car before you pay: accidents, salvage or flood titles, odometer readings and previous owners.
Check its history