the brake lines rust and they burst this occurred on my main brake line going to the abs controller I had no brakes from mechanics they say this is a common problem on usa made cars brake lines should never ever rust and burst
2002 Chevrolet Suburban brakes problems
127 complaints (44% of all complaints for this car). Typical mileage when it fails: 80,000. 12 crashes reported.
- owner complaints
- 127
- of this car's complaints
- 44%
- typical mileage
- 80,000
- crashes
- 12
- recalls
- 1
Which part fails
- Antilock/traction control/electronic limited slip42
- Foundation components: disc: rotor4
- Foundation components: disc: pads3
- Foundation components: disc: caliper2
- Antilock: wheel speed sensor2
- Supply: hoses, lines/piping, and fittings1
- Power assist: vacuum: hoses, lines/piping, and fittings1
- Foundation components: disc1
At what mileage
Complaints by mileage at the time of the problem.
Chevrolet Suburban brakes problems in other years
Specific symptoms reported on the 2002 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 2002 Chevrolet Suburban owners say
Most recent owner complaints, unedited.
Component service brakes, hydraulic:antilock/traction control/electronic limited slip
I was on the freeway there was traffic I went to slow down my brakes locked up on me my car fish tailed I released the brakes and they were still still locked. Caused me to slid at least 30 feet I was only going 35. Which caused me slam into the center divider
Parking brake will not hold the car in place and was like that when I bought it new. Unable to repair it to make it hold the car. Problems getting car inspected.
When driving my 2002 chevrolet suburban 1500 at speeds under 10 MPH in bumper-to-bumper traffic, the ABS independently activated. This happened in dry weather on a freeway. When the ABS independently activated, the car vibrated and accelerated with difficulty and jerked. The brakes locked up, causing a tire to blow out. The car caught fire where the brakes had locked up the front right wheel. The fire commander who examined the car after putting out the fire and the mechanic who is repairing the car both explained that improper ABS activation LED to a rupture in the brake line, exposing the leaking brake fluid to the heat generated by the locked brakes. This vehicle is experiencing the same problems as indicated in the federal safety agency recall 05v379000 concerning the ABS system but is not included in the recall due to the VIN. The car had been taken to a gm dealer two months earlier (in july) with a complaint about the same problems with the ABS system. The gm dealer did not mention the recall but made extensive (and expensive) repairs to the car. The car experienced the same problem again in september, when it LED to the fire. This was not enough time or the right season for the ABS to deteriorate from salt exposure since the july repairs. My car is probably excluded from the recall because it is registered in virginia. It should have been included because the car is registered in fairfax county, virginia, less than 15 miles from washington, d.c. And maryland. Fairfax county is further north than many parts of maryland and west virginia. The region has the same weather conditions, length of winter season, and exposure to salt as washington, d.c., west virginia, and maryland, which are included in the recall. Residents of the area frequently drive in these states, particularly in washington, d.c. And maryland, where many virginia residents work, shop, and seek entertainment.
Anti lock brakes are activating on there own when trying to stop and has almost caused me to crash 4 times. I finally pulled the ABS fuse out this stopped it but now I have no ABS iam in soap lake washington it shows a recall but only for a few states I bought my suburban new in boise idaho and now reside in washington state my vehacle is effected extremely bad with this problem
Brake lines rusted and brakes failed twice while driving vehicle. There were no accidents. First incident was the rear brake line burst. I replaced the rusted brake line. Front brake line burst 6 months after rear brake line was replaced. All front brake lines were so rusted, I removed and replaced all of them as a precaution. The brake lines rusted in areas where they were clamped, so that salt and dirt could not be cleaned out. Brake lines were unpainted bare steel.
Brakes failed while driving 60mph on highway I-476 (philadelphia pa) with the family in the vehicle. Upon braking to stop for traffic, the brake pedal went directly to the floor and pumping the pedal several times did not result in any braking of the vehicle. After managing to get the vehicle to a stop on the side of the road, and then pumping the brake pedal several more times, brake fluid could be seen coming from underneath the vehicle at both the area around the rear axle and the area under the drivers side seat. Later, inspection of the brake lines found them all to be severely rusted. After reading that this is an existing problem with gm vehicles, it is greatly disappointing, to say the least, that no notification or recall was given. Such a severe and scary safety problem should require at least notification of customers and better quality design/control of braking components.
Tl* the contact owns a 2002 chevrolet suburban. While driving approximately 5 MPH, the brake pedal pulsated without warning. The contact depressed the brake pedal to the floor to stop the vehicle. The vehicle was not diagnosed. The manufacturer was made aware of the failure and stated that there was no recall. The failure did not recur. The failure mileage was approximately 220,000.
Tl* the contact owns a 2002 chevrolet suburban. The contact stated that the ABS warning indicator illuminated. It was diagnosed that the hub sensor assembly needed to be replaced. The vehicle was repaired; however, the failure recurred. The manufacturer was notified. The contact stated that the failure was intermittent. The approximate failure mileage was 180,000. The VIN was not available. Updated 01/31/2017
Questions about the 2002 Chevrolet Suburban brakes
Does the 2002 Chevrolet Suburban have brakes problems?
Owners have filed 127 complaints about the brakes of the 2002 Chevrolet Suburban, 44% of all its complaints, more than any other problem.
At what mileage do 2002 Chevrolet Suburban brakes problems start?
The typical (median) mileage in owner complaints is 80,000 miles.
Was there a recall on the 2002 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 2002 Chevrolet Suburban problems
Fuel system 27Transmission 23Steering 22Engine 18Tires 18Seat belts 13Airbags 12Electrical 10Lights 9Visibility 9Acceleration 8Wheels 7Suspension 6Seats 5Body 4Locks 1
VIN decoder
See the problems and recalls for an exact car
Buying a used 2002 Chevrolet Suburban?
Check the exact car before you pay: accidents, salvage or flood titles, odometer readings and previous owners.
Check its history