2006 Pontiac Gto: rotors or pads wearing out early

Filed Dec 15, 2009 · Suspension · 14,500 miles · AZ

The excessive negative chamber and the inadequate strut bushings caused the front tires to prematurely wear out. The car was under warranty but I was told by the dealer this was not covered. I had to purchase new tires and pay to have the front end aligned.

Filed Jul 11, 2009 · Suspension · 20,000 miles · TX

No abnormal event LED to failures; context was normal driving. Failures were front suspension components; prematurely worn (1) strut rod bushings (I.e., radius rod bushings), (2) strut mount bushings, (3) lower control arm bushings, & (4) end link bushings. The consequences of (I.e., symptoms caused by) combination of 1, 2 & 3 were excessive, irregular, out-of-spec movements in, & wandering of, front suspension & steering components & front tires (which are connected to suspension/steering components)--both in camber & castor--as evidenced by (a) excessive negative camber, which caused (a1) premature inner tire wear, (b) excessive movement or vibration in front wheels, which caused (b1) some inner front tire contact with front struts, & (c) significantly reduced control, & increased instability, of car on road. Front tires are secured to car by triangulation of three major suspension components: front strut (secured to strut tower through strut mount bushing & bearing), strut rod (secured to front of engine cradle through strut rod bushings), & lower control arm (secured to side of engine cradle through lower control arm bushings), each of which experienced failure. Servicing dealer replaced, under manufacturers warranty, strut rod bushings, strut mount bushings, bearings, & hardware, lower control arm bushings (& lower control arms, since comes as an assembly), & end link bushings (have photos of collapsed, crowned strut mount bushings). Not replace tires or pro-rate. However, gm's replacement with oem parts does not correct underlying problem of poor quality/design oem suspension parts. Substantial out-of-spec movements in geometry of front suspension components in 04-06 gtos serious safety issue not appropriately addressed by gm or ntsb (ntsb action #pe07010). Appropriate solution is safety recall 04-06 gtos to replace front strut mount bushings & radius rod bushings w/high quality, heavy-duty parts (e.g., $350 part number gtotirerubpack at www.peddersusa.com).

Filed Apr 14, 2009 · Suspension, Tires · 30,000 miles · CA

Tl*the contact owns a 2006 pontiac gto. The contact stated that there was premature wear on the inner shoulders of his two front tires. The failure causes both front tire belts to be visible from the struts. In addition, the contact noticed sparks coming from the front tires while driving various speeds. The vehicle was taken to the dealer, but they could not determine the cause of the failure. The repair will cost $1,000. The vehicle is still under warranty; however, the dealer will not honor the warranty. The failure mileage was 30,000.

Filed Nov 24, 2008 · Suspension, Tires · 16,800 miles · CA

The car had been taken to the dealer in march 2008 regarding an issue of the front tires rubbing against the struts. The dealer identified the problem as an alignment issue and made a correction, however the excessive wear on the inside edges of the tires was not addressed. The excessive wear is not a tire defect and is a direct result of strut rub and alignment. Even when within alignment specs the excessive wear on the inside edges of the tires continues. At the time, in march, the front tires were rotated to the rear. In november the right rear tire, previously left front which had rubbed the strut, began to shred while driving 60 MPH. The tire did not go flat. The inside edge of the rubber peeled away from the tire in a 1/2 inch wide strip, exposing the steel belt. I am concerned that the other rear tire, previously right front, is about to do the same. I took the car to the dealer again and the dealer acknowledged the problem but said that because the alignment is within specs it is not a warranty issue. The dealer did offer to replace the one shredded tire at the expense of the dealership, but would not replace the other worn tire. The dealer also offered to recheck and adjust the front alignment because the front tires were again showing signs of premature wear on the inside edges. This is not a tire defect and is not normal wear and tear. This is a manufacturing and design issue that needs to be addressed by gm as many people are having the same problem. I want to be able to drive a car that I feel safe in, and this car has an increased risk of blowouts due to this problem. Gm not only needs to replace tires, it needs to determine how to solve the alignment/strut rub problem to prevent new tires from excessive and premature wear.

Filed Apr 23, 2008 · Suspension · 23,331 miles · AZ

Inside tread of both front tires prematurely worn at 6000 mi. Tires were rotated to the back and back tires wore the same way when placed in front. Car was brought to the dealer at 23,000 miles and the front and rear suspension was aligned at a cost of $110.00. I now have excellent tires with no rubber on the inside edges. Tires are 18' bridgestone portenza's that came on the car.

Filed Mar 1, 2007 · Suspension · 1,100 miles · CA

Bought new 2006 pontiac gto in june 2006 from hardin pontiac, anaheim, ca. Brought vehicle back to dealer in july for squeaking brakes and misalignment. Brought vehicle back to dealer again in august 2006 for failed front struts, destroyed bushings, misalignment, and continued brake squealing problem. Two service reps at dealer (ernie and matt) informed me they had no replacement struts until october 2006. Service rep (matt) recommended I drive the car in this condition during a 3,200 mile vacation trip. I declined due to safety and creating more damage to the car. Dealer would not put me in a rental car despite warranty. I then offered to pay for the aftermarket replacements, covering the difference in oem and aftermarket parts myself. I provided dealer with all information concerning aftermarket parts, along with installation instructions and technical contact information. The dealer service manager (darin) agreed to put me in a rental vehicle until the aftermarket parts could be installed. The dealer then waited more than a week to order the aftermarket parts, at which time they became backordered for an additional two weeks. I then was forced, because of dealer delays, to cover the rental car. I finally picked up my car some five weeks after taking it in for installation of aftermarket parts. I found (and have documentation to prove) that my car had been driven for 90 miles with bad struts while in the dealer's possession. I also had to pay for the rental car. I was told by the gen mgr at hardin pontiac this was because his regional mgr would not authorize the rental car to be paid, even though this was authorized prior to rental by the service dept mgr at the same dealer. I have since learned that the installation of the aftermarket parts was not done per written instructions provided by myself and the manufacturer, which has caused the aftermarket components to fail, and premature wear on the tires.