Tl* the contact owns a 2002 gmc sierra. While driving 45 MPH, the brake pedal was depressed, but the vehicle failed to stop. The contact veered into a ditch to avoid a collision. The vehicle was towed to an independent mechanic who diagnosed that the brake lines were corroded and needed to be replaced. The vehicle was repaired. The manufacturer was not notified of the failure. The failure mileage was 100,000.
2002 GMC Sierra brakes problems
145 complaints (58% of all complaints for this car). Typical mileage when it fails: 44,600. 17 crashes reported.
- owner complaints
- 145
- of this car's complaints
- 58%
- typical mileage
- 44,600
- crashes
- 17
- recalls
- 2
Which part fails
- Antilock/traction control/electronic limited slip45
- Foundation components: disc: rotor16
- Foundation components: disc: pads3
- Power assist: hydraulic2
- Foundation components: disc: caliper2
- Foundation components2
- Antilock2
- Foundation components: drum1
At what mileage
Complaints by mileage at the time of the problem.
GMC Sierra brakes problems in other years
Specific symptoms reported on the 2002 GMC Sierra 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
Parking brake
- What is wrong
- On certain pickup trucks equipped with manual transmissions and built with either pbr parking brake systems or trw parking brake systems, the parking brake friction linings may wear to an extent where the parking brake can become ineffective in immobilizing a parked vehicle.
- Risk
- If the parking brake does not hold, unintended vehicle movement could occur, which could result in a crash.
- Remedy
- Dealers will install a low-force spring clip retainer for vehicles equipped with a pbr parking brake system. On vehicles equipped with the trw parking brake system, dealers will install a redesigned parking brake cable assembly. The recall began on july 29, 2005. Owners may contact chevrolet at 1‑800‑630‑2438 or gmc at 1‑866‑996‑9463.
Recall number 05V161000 · Recall details
Related investigations
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
Parking brake failure
In a letter dated april 20, 2005, gm notified the federal safety agency that it had decided that defects that relate to motor vehicle safety exist in certain model year (my) 1999-2002 c/k 1500 series (pbr parking brake system) and my 2001-2005 c/k 2500 and 3500 series (trw parking brake system) pickups with manual transmissions.according to gm, some of these vehicles may have conditions that cause the friction linings to wear to an extent where the parking brake can become ineffective in immobilizing a parked vehicle.gm's action covers an estimated total of 142,585 vehicles.dealers will install a low-force spring clip retainer for vehicles equipped with the pbr parking brake system and install a redesigned parking brake cable assembly on vehicles equipped with the trw parking brake system. A total of 58 non-duplicative complaints were received by odi and gm concerning the approximately 59,000 my 1999-2002 c/k 1500 series pickup trucks with the pbr parking brake system.these included 22 alleged rollaway incidents, resulting in a rate of 38.5 rollaway incidents per 100,000 vehicles.odi is aware of 24 complaints regarding the my 2001-2005 c/k 2500 and 3500 series manual transmission trucks recalled by gm, including 5 alleging rollaway incidents.though the conditions described in gm's letter are also present in the c/k trucks with automatic transmissions, the rollaway rate in those vehicles was similar to those observed in peer vehicles studied by odi in this investigation.this engineering analysis is closed. For additional information, see the attached closing report.
EA04011
Parking brake failure
Odi opened pe03-057 to assess parking brake ineffectiveness in the subject vehicles.these vehicles are equipped with four wheel disc brakes that incorporate a single-shoe drum-in-hat parking brake independent of the service brakes.complaint and warranty data indicate that the parking brake linings tend to wear out early in the life of the vehicle (at an average of 24 months in service), reducing the parking brake system's torque below that needed to immobilize the vehicle.gm has attributed this accelerated wear to foreign material intrusion and a failure of the brake shoe to properly self-center within its brake drum.effective with the start of my 2003 production, a newer reduced force hold-down clip was introduced to facilitate brake shoe disengagement from the drum surface.this part is also available at the service level for the my 1999-2002 vehicles.gm has indicated that the paking brake is intended to operate in conjunction with the transmission to immobilze parked vehicles, and that in many cases, accelerated parking brake lining wear is caused by rough use, vehicle modifications, and driving with the parking engaged. Odi has upgraded the preliminary evaluation to an engineering analysis to gather further information concerning parking brake usage factors and the circumstances surrounding the seventeen reported vehicle crashes.
PE03057
What 2002 GMC Sierra owners say
Most recent owner complaints, unedited.
On the morning of friday august 21, 2015, my wife went to move my 2002 gmc sierra. She pulled out of our driveway and proceeded up-hill about 300-400 feet, and then turned around in a neighbor's driveway, when coming back down the hill she tried to brake to stop in front of our house, but the brakes totally failed without any warning. She then went up a slight hill on the other side of our house, but still couldn't stop, and didn't think to put the truck in park as she slowed. She rolled backwards down the hill and was able to steer into a neighbor's yard where the truck came to rest on a berm. At the time she said there were cars parked on both sides of the street and had a car been coming the opposite direction she would have crashed into it. Had there been pedestrians they could have been hit as well. When I came home that afternoon, I added brake fluid to the reservoir, and then pushed on the brake pedal. I saw a huge stream of fluid pour from below the driver's side door. I looked under the truck and found the brake lines surprisingly corroded. If sudden, immediate loss of brakes without any warning is not cause for a recall I do not know what is.
Left house and ABS brake light came on, shut the truck off and ABS brake pump under truck would not stop running even with key off. So had to take fuse out. At that time I drove back home, but if you push down on brake it will go to the floor. June 2014 had truck in shop to have all brake lines replaced and fixed at auffenberg in carbondale illinois due to brakes all of a sudden going out and all lines rusted and now 2,500 miles later this happens also the emgerency brake is not working either. So was there more damage done from all this that should be on recall and us not paying the bill for these defects.
Applied brakes to stop and brake peddle went to floor do to rotted brake line.
Made a left hand turn at a traffic light after it turned green. I was the only vehicle at the time making the turn, nobody in front or behind me. Drove about 1/10th a mile to the next light, when it turned yellow, I immediately hit the brakes to stop. At first the brakes worked then my foot went to the floor, I had no brakes. I came to a stop in the middle of the intersection. I then backed up, to get behind the light. As I stated at the beginning, there was nobody in front or behind me at the other light making the turn with me, so when I was approaching the next light, I had nobody in front of me, behind me or to my right. The roadway was four lanes, two in each direction, with a center medium. I was driving in the left lane. So I am looking to drive another day and someone else too. The cause of the problem is that the brake line that goes from the front to the rear, running along side the frame, on the driver side, rusted out and broke. I contacted gm about this, and after talking and complaining about what happened, they said there was nothing they could do for me. My problem is that, this is a safety issue, and they take no responsibility for it. I should have been at least notified in some way as an owner that my life may be in danger if I do not have my brake lines checked and replaced if needed. They no about the problem and are not contacting owners of my vehicle and others with the same problem. I am looking to have not been hurt or killed or hurting and killing someone else. I did not know of the problem until after it happened. I am now faced with doing the work myself, which is a major undertaking, or having the local gmc dealership doing it for 1500+, which is where it is right now, waiting for my call. Thank you.
Started vehicle and began driving on street. Brake pedal went to the floor and brakes were not normal. Stopped vehicle and saw large puddle of brake fluid under vehicle. Had vehicle towed to repair shop and was told brake line rusted and all brake lines were corroded and that gm has had problems with this in many vehicles. Fortunate that failure had not occurred at highway speeds. Repair estimate was $3200 for replacement of brake lines and associated parts.
Dear sir or ma'am, I have a 2002 gmc sierra truck that I bought new in 2002. The brakes recently failed completely while my wife was driving on or about september 26, 2014. The brake pedal went to the floor without significant braking action. Fortunately she was able to stop safely and was not involved in an accident. Upon examination, the brake line to the left rear wheel was completely rusted through. I examined the rest of the lines and noticed that the brake lines, the transmission cooler line and the fuel line all show signs of major corrosion, especially along the frame. I have less than 43,000 miles on this truck and it was garage-kept the first nine years I owned it. I live in ky where the roads are only salted a few times a year. The rest of the vehicle is relatively rust free. The truck is unsafe to drive now. Even if I patch the leak, the rest of the lines could fail at any time. I could suffer catastrophic brake failure while towing my boat or horse trailer or simply going down a hill. Furthermore, the fuel lines are under considerable pressure and if they rupture, there could be a very dangerous fire hazard. If the transmission cooler lines rupture, I could have a complete transmission failure. I have read that this is a known issue with chevrolet and gmc trucks for years 1999 to 2003 and that the nthsa has looked into this in the past. If other trucks are in the same condition as mine (and I believe there are), there is a major safety problem on the roads right now. Yet, to date no recall has been issued. I think this is courting disaster. It is my opinion that lines made with inferior steel were used in the construction of this vehicle, yet gm refuses to acknowledge the fact. I urge you to look further into this matter. This is nthsa case number: [xxx] information redacted pursuant to the freedom of information act (foia), 5 u.s.c. 552(b)(6).
Tl* the contact owns a 2002 gmc sierra 1500. The contact stated that while traveling 55 MPH, the brake pedal sank abormally into the floorboard and failed to stop the vehicle. The brake light illuminated on the instrument panel. The vehicle was merged to the side of the road where the vehicle was turned off and restarted. The manufacturer was not notified. The vehicle was taken to an independent mechanic. The technician diagnosed that the brake lines needed to be replaced. The failure and current mileage was 127,000.
I was driving approx 35 MPH when a dog ran in front of my vehicle. I applied the brakes to avoid hitting the dog. A moment later I went to apply brakes to slow down for an unfamiliar turn and my pedal went to the floor. I managed to downshift to come to a stop and upon inspection, noticed a hole in my drivers side rear brake line. All of the brake lines have a severe amount of rust. The bundle of lines running along the frame on the driver's side are the worst.
When is there going to be a recall on the rusted brake lines, I already crashed in 2006 with the ABS system which failed and was a failure to start with and when they fixed, the fix only lasted for 14 months and since then I have be driving with conventional brakes,so are they waiting for me and others to crash again with these rusty brake lines. P.s. Going on 3rd. Set of rotors in the rear, only 65,000 mi.
Questions about the 2002 GMC Sierra brakes
Does the 2002 GMC Sierra have brakes problems?
Owners have filed 145 complaints about the brakes of the 2002 GMC Sierra, 58% of all its complaints, more than any other problem.
At what mileage do 2002 GMC Sierra brakes problems start?
The typical (median) mileage in owner complaints is 44,600 miles.
Was there a recall on the 2002 GMC Sierra brakes?
Yes, 2 recalls: 05V379000, 05V161000. Check your VIN to see if your car still needs the free repair.
What year does the GMC Sierra have bad brakes?
The GMC Sierra model years with the most brakes complaints are 1999 (338 complaints), 2000 (228 complaints) and 2001 (150 complaints).
Other 2002 GMC Sierra problems
Engine 25Transmission 18Body 17Steering 12Suspension 12Tires 10Electrical 6Visibility 6Acceleration 4Seat belts 4Airbags 3Fuel system 3Locks 3Seats 3Wheels 3Lights 2
VIN decoder
See the problems and recalls for an exact car
Buying a used 2002 GMC Sierra?
Check the exact car before you pay: accidents, salvage or flood titles, odometer readings and previous owners.
Check its history