Tl* the contact owns a 2001 gmc yukon. The contact stated that pulling up to a stop light, the brake pedal was depressed and went to the floorboard extending the braking distance. The contact stated that the ABS and brake warning lights remained illuminated. The vehicle was taken to an independent mechanic to be diagnosed. The contact was informed that the brake line disintegrated and needed to be replaced. The vehicle was repaired. Neither the dealer nor manufacturer was made aware of the failure. The failure mileage was approximately 200,000.
2001 GMC Yukon brakes problems
92 complaints (47% of all complaints for this car). Typical mileage when it fails: 80,000. 5 crashes reported.
- owner complaints
- 92
- of this car's complaints
- 47%
- typical mileage
- 80,000
- crashes
- 5
- recalls
- 1
Which part fails
- Antilock/traction control/electronic limited slip32
- Antilock/traction control/electronic limited slip: control unit/module5
- Foundation components: hoses, lines/piping, and fittings2
- Conventional2
- Foundation components: master cylinder1
- Conventional: mechanical1
- Antilock: control unit/module1
At what mileage
Complaints by mileage at the time of the problem.
0k-25k
25k-50k
50k-75k
75k-100k
100k-125k
125k-150k
150k-175k
175k-200k
200k+
GMC Yukon brakes problems in other years
Specific symptoms reported on the 2001 GMC Yukon 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
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
What 2001 GMC Yukon owners say
Most recent owner complaints, unedited.
On 01/23/2018 I got into an accident. The brakes when applied hesitated for a few then finally took hold but by that time it was to late and I ended up on someones lawn after crashing through their white picket fence, then rolling completely over on its top, totally the yukon. My concern is the no airbags deployed at all. Thankfully, I only received minor scrapes and bruises. Plus, I am very sore still. I am concerned that this could of been a worse case, where I got seriously injured or even death because the airbags did not deploy upon impact. I have notified my insurance company to make sure there is a written paper trail pertaining to these issues with the yukon. Specifically, the brakes not catching in time and the airbags not deploying. I would appreciate a response back to this matter as soon as you can. I also believe that the accident might not of resulted in totaling my vehicle if the brakes were working properly. When I applied brakes it felt like they were catching but seemed to take forever to stop soon enough, almost a hesitation on the brakes part. Plus, the airbags did not work either. So I need to know where I can file a claim pertaining to totaling my vehicle because of faulty brakes and airbags not deploying. This could of been a worse case! Thank you
Tl* the contact owns a 2001 gmc yukon. While driving at an unknown speed on the highway, the contact depressed the brake pedal with excessive force in order to avoid another vehicle. The contact noticed that some of the brake functionality was lost. The vehicle was taken to an independent mechanic where it was diagnosed that a piston was defective and needed to be replaced. Three months later, while trying to shift gears, the contact heard an abnormal popping sound. The vehicle was taken back to the independent mechanic where it was diagnosed that the brake lines were defective and needed to be replaced. The dealer was not contacted. The manufacturer was notified of the failure and offered no assistance. The failure mileage was approximately 250,000.
Brake lines extremely corroded and line to rear brakes completely failed leaking fluid. Vehicle failed while driving and attempting to stop. Vehicles stopping distance greatly increased.
Hard brake lines have completely corroded and brake fluid flows profusely from the corroded lines. Brake pedal goes to floor and vehicle is unable to stop. Had to put into neutral and use parking brake to avoid an accident. Gmc service department is unaware of any service bulletins or kits to replace defective and corroded brake lines on these truck and suvs.
Failed brakes due to the corroded brake lines- safety issue.
In aug 2005, the ABS light on our 2001 gmc yukon with 51k miles came on and there was a grinding noise (the pump) underneath the driver's side which remains on when the vehicle is turned off. The ABS fuse must be removed to shut off the pump. Our local gmc dealership repaired it for $1100 ($870 for the ABS module). In sep 2009, the ABS failed again at 91k miles. Our gmc dealership helped cover the cost of repair by covering the cost of the module. We had to wait 2 months (nov 2009) before the vehicle could be repaired because we were told that the module was being redesigned to fix these problems. In oct 2014, the ABS failed again at 138k miles. Our gmc dealership put us in contact with gmc customer service with the hope that gmc could assist in covering the cost of repair. After several frustrating phone calls with supervisors, we were told that the vehicle was too old and therefore gmc would not assist. During these phone calls gmc stated that there was a recall for the vehicle in "salt-belt" states but not california. Obviously the ABS module is defective as a relative with a similar vehicle (chevy tahoe) had the same issue with the ABS module. In searching the internet, we found a company that states that they can repair the module for under $100 and guarantees the repair for life. If they can do this, why can't gm make the necessary changes to the ABS module and give customers the peace of mind that the vehicle will be safe. Hopefully the federal safety agency will use this and similar complaints and force gm to issue a recall on the ABS module.
Brakes were weak, almost to floor so the car was towed home. While slowly backing the car into driveway the brakes failed completely. Stepped on emergency brake and intermediate cable broke. The e-brake cable failed because of rust and the brake lines to the ebcm where they go over frame all failed. The only part on this car that has rusted beyond anything normal are the brake lines. Unbelievably rusted! When the brakes (e-brake and both lines) all failed the car rolled out of controlled into a tree. The rear hatch glass shattered and I had a sore neck for 5-days. This is apparently a common problem to this car where salt is used. The brakes started to go weak (1-line must have failed) as my wife approached a toll booth, only luck prevented a catastrophic event from happening. I can't believe we were not notified or the car was not recalled! Gm and the federal safety agency shame on you. You knew of a safety problem and have done nothing. Gm stating that you will still have brakes if the line fails is a weak argument, you have to press much harder after the first line goes and the other line is ready to fail. Guess what happens, no brakes. Please have a gm executive drive one of these death traps and hit the brakes hard. The last thing that should rust are the brake lines. A little common sense goes a long way.
When exiting my driveway I went down the street to the stop sign , when I applied the brake the peddle went to the floor and the truck did not stop. It was good that I wasn't going faster. When I took my truck ( youkon ) to the repair shop I explained the issue to the repair man. I got home and he called me back and asked me to return to the shop to take a look at the trucks problems. When returning to the shop the truck was lifted up and he showed me the brake lines and the gas lines that were corroded and needed to be replaced as soon as possible . He also explained the time and labor involved. I was surprised of how much labor and time was involved to repair these issues . He said the cost including parts and labor will be about 2,500. To 3,000. Dollars, that is if he didn't come across any other problems.
I was driving locally,when I used my brakes to slow down as I was approaching a red light I did not have properly functioning brakes,pedal went to floor,I used emergency brake this prevented me from hitting car in front of me. This occurred in august,2012.brake lines were determined to have rusted out,brakes failed ,a $444 repair was needed. In november 2013 a similar incident occurred with my son driving. This resulted in a $ 1111 dollar repair bill. And today july 8 2014 while backing out onto street another brake failure occurred bill to be determined ? *tr updated 3/18/2015
Questions about the 2001 GMC Yukon brakes
Does the 2001 GMC Yukon have brakes problems?
Owners have filed 92 complaints about the brakes of the 2001 GMC Yukon, 47% of all its complaints, more than any other problem.
At what mileage do 2001 GMC Yukon brakes problems start?
The typical (median) mileage in owner complaints is 80,000 miles.
Was there a recall on the 2001 GMC Yukon brakes?
Yes, 1 recall: 05V379000. Check your VIN to see if your car still needs the free repair.
What year does the GMC Yukon have bad brakes?
The GMC Yukon model years with the most brakes complaints are 1999 (113 complaints), 2001 (92 complaints) and 2015 (90 complaints).
Other 2001 GMC Yukon problems
Airbags 18Electrical 18Tires 17Seat belts 15Transmission 13Engine 12Steering 10Fuel system 9Visibility 8Body 7Lights 6Seats 6Suspension 4Acceleration 3Driver assistance 3Locks 2Wheels 1
VIN decoder
See the problems and recalls for an exact car
Buying a used 2001 GMC Yukon?
Check the exact car before you pay: accidents, salvage or flood titles, odometer readings and previous owners.
Check its history