Check a VIN

2002 Chevrolet Tahoe problems

The most common problem on the 2002 Chevrolet Tahoe is brakes, typically around 105,139 miles. It has 1.6 times the complaints of a typical Tahoe model year.

Typical year1.6x the typical complaints
Year score
51/100
Owner complaints
448
Recalls
3
Service bulletins
546
Worst area
Brakes
Fuel economy
14-15mpg
Typical repair
$1,201

The worst 2002 Chevrolet Tahoe problems

Ranked by number of owner complaints. Mileage and cost come from what owners wrote.

Problems by type

Tap a problem to see which part fails, at what mileage and in which other years.

Specific symptoms reported on the 2002 Chevrolet Tahoe

ABS 57Brake failure 38No deployment 21Tire blowout 16Grinding brakes 15Fuel pump 13Stalling 13Pulling 12Transmission failure 11Won't start 10Fire or smoke 9Fuel gauge 9Harsh shifting 9Seat belt 9Knocking 8Ball joint 6Jerking 5Loss of power 5Slipping 5Won't shift 5

Recalls 3

Service brakes, hydraulic: antilock/traction control/electronic limited slipReported August 29, 2005 · 1,353,718 vehicles affected
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

StructureReported March 7, 2003 · 3,674 vehicles affected
What is wrong
Certain pickup truck, van, and mini van conversions equipped with southern comfort built running boards that contain certain courtesy lights manufactured by american technology components, inc. These units contain a courtesy light or lights that might overheat when the wire harness is exposed to excessive moisture and road salt.
Risk
This overheating condition can cause the running board to melt or cause a fire.
Remedy
Dealers will replace the wiring harness on these running boards. Owner notification began march 7, 2003. 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 southern comfort at 1‑800‑745‑6096.

Recall number 03V094000 · Recall details

Seats: front assembly: head restraintReported September 17, 2002 · 558,904 vehicles affected
What is wrong
On certain sport utility vehicles equipped with rearward folding head restraints on the second row seats, two potential pinch points exist on each of the folding head restraints when the restraints are folded rearward as the seatback is folded down.
Risk
If a person were to insert their finger(s) into the pinch point when the head restraint folds, it could trap and pinch the finger(s) causing injury.
Remedy
Dealers will install protective covers over the pinch points. Owner notification began november 8, 2002. 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 1‑800‑222‑1020, gmc at 1‑800‑462‑8782, or cadillac at 1‑800‑458‑8006.

Recall number 02V253000 · Recall details

See all 3 recalls for the 2002 Chevrolet Tahoe

Defect investigations

Brake line corrosion failureOpened January 5, 2011, closed April 8, 2015

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

Parking brake failureOpened December 20, 2005, closed May 31, 2006

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 activationOpened April 28, 2005, closed September 13, 2005

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

Steel wheel rim fractureOpened June 12, 2003, closed November 3, 2003

There have been less than 2 complaints per 100,000 subject vehicles related to the alleged defect.the oldest vehicles (my 1999) have only 2 complaints in over 140 thousand vehicles after over 4 years in service.the rate of warranty claims potentially related to the alleged defect is less than 0.1%.there are no known incidents involving rapid loss of tire pressure or loss of vehicle control. A defect trend 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 no safety-related defect exists.the agency will take further action if warranted by the circumstances.

PE03026

Throttle sticking closedOpened August 1, 2002, closed January 12, 2004

This investigation involves the general motors corporation (gm)throttle body (tb) utilized in model year (my) 1999-2002 silverado, sierra, tahoe, suburban, avalanche and yukon (subject vehicle(s)) with 4.8l, 5.3l, and 6.0l engines. The tb valve may intermittently stick in a closed position.in such a situation, an operator may apply additional accelerator pedal force to increase engine speed.the application of additional accelerator pedal force, to open a stuck throttle valve, may open the throttle valve more than intended and, in turn, accelerate the engine and vehicle more than intended and reasonably expected by the driver.on august 1, 2002, the office of defects investigation (odi), of the federal safety agency, opened this engineering analysis.the investigation revealed that two factors may cause the defect: 1) tb manufacturing process problems; and 2) accumulation of deposits (a pcv system by-product) on or around the tb throttle valve and bore.odi concludes that the tb performs in a defective manner after analyzing gm?s data submissions, and test data collected by the vehicle research and test center (vrtc).fifty-nine crashes are alleged to have occurred as a result of gm?s tb defect.the majority of the crashes involve a single vehicle, engaging in a close quarter vehicle maneuver (or low speed), and causing only minor property damage.four out of the fifty-nine crashes involve injury, and those injuries were minor.although gm?s tb is defective, based on the evidence gathered, odi has found that the accelerator pedal force required to open a stuck throttle valve is negligible, and the throttle valve does not stick in the open position.therefore this engineering analysis (ea02-015) will be closed at this time.the closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by the federal safety agency that a safety-related defect does not exist.for a detailed discussion of the tb component and testing, please see the attached report.

EA02015

Technical service bulletins for the 2002 Chevrolet Tahoe 546

Bulletins tell dealers how to fix known problems. A warranty extension means the manufacturer pays for that repair for longer.

See all 546 bulletins for the 2002 Chevrolet Tahoe

2002 Chevrolet Tahoe fuel economy

Official EPA estimates in miles per gallon (MPGe for electric). Ranges cover trims that share the same engine.

EngineDriveCityHighwayCombined
4.8L 8‑cylRWD131815
5.3L 8‑cylRWD131714
4.8L 8‑cyl4WD131614
5.3L 8‑cyl4WD12-131614

What 2002 Chevrolet Tahoe owners say

Most recent owner complaints, unedited.

Filed May 13, 2026 · Electrical · 186,000 miles · IN · fire

The contact owned a 2002 Chevrolet Tahoe. The contact stated that while driving at 20 MPH occupied with his sister-in-law and her children, the contact smelled smoke coming from the driver seat of the vehicle the contact mention he pulled to the right side of the road, exiting everyone out the vehicle when he noticed that the drive seat caught fire. No warning lights illuminated. The contact mentioned she noticed smoke and flames coming from the engine, and smoke started coming inside the vehicle. present. The contact mention he called 911. No injuries were sustained. No medical attention was required. A police report was filed. The fire department extinguished the fire, and they informed the contact the fire was from an electrical issue. The vehicle seat of the vehicle was destroyed. The vehicle was not repaired. The manufacturer was not notified of the failure. The failure mileage was 186,000.

Filed Sep 29, 2025 · Engine · MO

My vehicle has been diagnosed as needing the exhaust manifold bolts replaced. I have read that this is an ongoing issue that poses a risk to drivers and passengers due to the fumes, but has not been recalled by the manufacturer.

Filed Dec 21, 2023 · Airbags · AL

We were sitting in car with it idling, the right-side air bag just deployed without collision. We turned the ignition off waited a few moments and turned it back on and the right-side dash airbag deployed without any warning. The vehicle has not been in any collisions.

Filed Sep 23, 2022 · Driver assistance, Fuel system · CA

My right side wheel feels like it’s going to fall off and indicate the abs and emergency parking brake. I believe it’s a wheel hub bearing that’s coming loose or tie rods I’m not sure and One time the emergency parking brake engage on me and I had to pull over to the side and wasn’t able to drive it. When I turn on the engine or driving , idling I smell gasoline really bad

Filed Mar 25, 2021 · Brakes · 220,536 miles · TX

I have an 02 tahoe z71 that recently I've been having brake problems at slow speeds when trying to stop like the ABS is trying to kick in randomly between about 5 to 15 MPH when slowing for red-lights or stop signs there's times I have to let off and reapply brake 2 to 3 times at least before it will actually stop without the ABS kicking in. I read about some recalls on this on 02 tahoes but my VIN said I had 0 unfixed recalls

Filed Dec 11, 2020 · Brakes · 141,000 miles · AL

Abs and brake lights remain on after tahoe is cranked and driven.

Filed Dec 10, 2020 · Airbags · 150,000 miles · MI · crash · 1 injury

Tl* the contact owned a 2002 chevrolet tahoe. The contact stated that while driving approximately 25 MPH when the vehicle ran across black ice causing the contact to lose control of the vehicle. The vehicle began to spin uncontrollably eventually crashing into a concrete wall with the front-end of the vehicle. No air bags deployed. The contact received injuries to their knee, shoulder, neck, back, and eye. Medical attention was needed. A police report was filed. The vehicle towed and deemed totaled. The dealer was not contacted. The manufacturer was not made aware of the failure. The approximate failure mileage was 150,000.*dt the contact recieved a claim id number #odi11382901 and case number [xxx].

Filed Aug 4, 2020 · Seats · CA

Access to the third row seating cable lacy failed. If anyone in the third row needed to get out in an emergency they would be trapped most likely. All rear seat cables are broken.

Filed Aug 4, 2020 · Lights · 130,670 miles · TN

Have replaced running lights about 30ty times both rt and lt.finely it burned out so bad that it want let me replace the bulbs they just don't work anymore.this started about 2015 I didn't know of this site so here what can we do.thanks

Filed Jul 13, 2020 · Steering · MN

Feels like I'm driving a boat. Delayed action when steering . Vehicle is used intermittently

Used buying checklistWhat to check on a 2002 Chevrolet Tahoe before you buy

Compare the 2002 Chevrolet Tahoe

Tahoe vs Ford ExpeditionTahoe vs Chevrolet SuburbanTahoe vs GMC YukonTahoe vs Toyota SequoiaTahoe vs Nissan Armada

Other model years

199119921993199419951996199719981999200020012002200320042005200620072008200920102011201220132014201520162017201820192020202120222023202420252026

Questions about the 2002 Chevrolet Tahoe

Is the 2002 Chevrolet Tahoe reliable?

Owners have filed 448 complaints about the 2002 Chevrolet Tahoe, 1.6 times a typical Tahoe model year.

What is the 2002 Chevrolet Tahoe year score?

The 2002 Chevrolet Tahoe scores 51 out of 100 (below average). The score compares it with the other model years of the Chevrolet Tahoe: 75 is a typical year, 50 means twice the usual complaints, and serious complaints and recalls lower it.

What is the most common problem with the 2002 Chevrolet Tahoe?

Brakes, with 182 complaints, typically around 105,139 miles. Next is steering (40).

How many recalls does the 2002 Chevrolet Tahoe have?

3 recalls, covering service brakes, hydraulic, structure and seats.

Was there a recall on the 2002 Chevrolet Tahoe brakes?

Yes, 1 recall: 05V379000. Check your VIN to see if your car still needs the free repair.

What year does the Chevrolet Tahoe have bad brakes?

The Chevrolet Tahoe model years with the most brakes complaints are 2001 (272 complaints), 1999 (249 complaints) and 2015 (196 complaints).

What gas mileage does the 2002 Chevrolet Tahoe get?

Official estimates for the 2002 Chevrolet Tahoe range from 14 to 15 mpg combined. The most efficient version (4.8L 8-cyl, RWD) gets 13 city and 18 highway.

Share your experience with the 2002 Chevrolet Tahoe

Tell other buyers what went wrong and what it cost. We review every report before it appears, and we never publish names, emails or VINs.

No names, contact details or links. Reports about a dealer or a person are not published.

VIN decoder

See the problems and recalls for an exact car

Buying a used 2002 Chevrolet Tahoe?

Check the exact car before you pay: accidents, salvage or flood titles, odometer readings and previous owners.

Check its history
Is this car on a recall?Check VIN