VEHICLE DESCRIPTION: CERTAIN PASSENGER VEHICLES, EQUIPPED WITH AUTOMATIC TRANSAXLES, FAIL TO COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF FMVSS NO. 114, "THEFT PROTECTION." THESE VEHICLES WERE BUILT WITH AN IMPROPERLY ADJUSTED AUTOMATIC TRANSAXLE PARK LOCK CABLE ASSEMBLY. IF IMPROPERLY ADJUSTED, IT IS POSSIBLE TO SHIFT FROM THE "PARK" POSITION WITH THE IGNITION KEY REMOVED.
VEHICLE DESCRIPTION: CERTAIN PASSENGER VEHICLES FAIL TO COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF FMVSS NO. 301, "FUEL SYSTEM INTEGRITY." THESE VEHICLES WERE BUILT WITH AN INADEQUATE VENT VALVE WELD ON THE TOP PORTION OF THE FUEL TANK.
IN 2007, BASED ON RECOMMENDATIONS FROM SERVICE TECHNICIANS AND OTHER OWNERS OF MY CAR'S MODEL, I PURCHASED NEW MICHELIN HYDROEDGE TIRES. UPON RECENT INSPECTION AND ROTATION AT A SERVICE CENTER, IT WAS NOTED THAT ALL FOUR OF MY TIRES WERE DRY-ROTTING AT THE SIDEWALL NEAR THE TREADS. THE TECHNICIAN STATED THAT "MICHELINS DO THAT." THE TIRES ARE 4 1/2 YEARS OLD, HAVE BEEN DRIVEN 23,000 MILES WITH VERY LITTLE TREAD WEAR (9/32" LEFT) AND ARE NOT HOUSED INSIDE A GARAGE WHERE OZONE COULD AFFECT THEM. I DRIVE 10 MILES ROUND TRIP EACH WORK DAY. I ALSO DO NOT LIVE IN AN URBAN AREA. I RESEARCHED THIS ISSUE ONLINE AND FOUND MANY SIMILAR COMPLAINTS OF DRY ROT LEADING TO BLOWOUTS, OFTEN WITH RELATED ACCIDENTS. IN MANY INSTANCES MICHELIN DENIED ANY RESPONSIBILITY AND SITED EVERYTHING FROM ENVIRONMENTAL REACTIONS TO POTHOLE AND CURB HITS BY DRIVERS SOMETIMES DENYING A CLAIM BEFORE RECEIVING THE CUSTOMER'S DOCUMENTATION. THERE ARE TOO MANY COMPLAINTS TO IGNORE ANYMORE. JUST BECAUSE MANY OF US HAVE FOUND THE PROBLEM BEFORE THE TIRES CAUSED AN ACCIDENT DOESN'T MEAN THIS IS NOT SERIOUS. HOW MANY OCCURRENCES DOES THE NHTSA NEED BEFORE IT ACTS PROACTIVELY TO END THIS SAFETY RISK? I HOPE THIS COMPLAINT SPEAKS FOR CONSUMERS WHO FILED PREVIOUSLY, OTHERS WHO HAVE NOT FILED AND FOR THOSE WHO DO NOT KNOW THEY ARE AT RISK. PLEASE DO NOT WAIT UNTIL A HIGH-PROFILE FIERY CRASH BRINGS LIGHT TO THIS ISSUE (AS SEEMS TOO OFTEN TO BE THE CASE IN OUR SOCIETY.) MICHELIN HAS HAD A FEW MAJOR TIRE RECALLS, ONE JUST RECENTLY, SO THERE IS PROBABLE CAUSE TO INVESTIGATE THE DRY ROT COMPLAINTS. INVESTIGATE NOW SO WE CAN ALL BENEFIT FROM THE NHTSA, AN ENTITY THAT IS AND WILL CONTINUE TO BE ACCOUNTABLE FOR THE SAFETY OF ALL TAXPAYERS. THANK YOU. *JS
No injuries · No fire · No crash
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2001 SATURN SC2 EQUIPPED WITH SIGMA SUPREME TIRES. WHILE DRIVING VARIOUS SPEEDS THE VEHICLE WOULD SHAKE. SHE DID NOT WANT TO PROVIDE AN APPROXIMATE SPEED BECAUSE THE FAILURE OCCURRED WHILE DRIVING AT ANY SPEED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN INDEPENDENT REPAIR SHOP WHERE SHE WAS INFORMED THAT THERE WAS TREAD SEPARATION ON THE FRONT DRIVERS SIDE TIRE. THE TIRE WAS REPLACED. THE FAILURE HAD NOT RECURRED. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGES WERE 67,419. THE VIN WAS UNAVAILABLE.
No injuries · No fire · No crash
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2001 SATURN SC2. THE CONTACT STATED WHILE INSERTING THE KEY INTO THE IGNITION, SHE NOTICED THAT THE IGNITION SWITCH WAS LOOSE. THE IGNITION SWITCH WAS REPLACED BY THE DEALER. THE FAILURE RECURRED. THE IGNITION SWITCH WAS REPLACED BY THE DEALER AUGUST 2003, JUNE 2004 AND AUGUST 2006. THE FAILURE PERSISTED AND THE DEALER INFORMED THE CONTACT THAT THE IGNITION CYLINDER WOULD TO BE REPLACED AGAIN. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT CONTACTED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT FURTHER REPAIRED AT THE TIME OF THE COMPLAINT. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS APPROXIMATELY 29,000 AND THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 67,579.
No injuries · No fire · No crash
I HEAR A LOT OF PROBLEMS WITH THE SUNROOF NOT WORKING PROPERLY. I WENT TO THE DEALER AND THEY WERE GOING TO CHARGE ME OVER $1000. I TOLD THEM NO BECAUSE I THINK IT SHOULD BE FREE SINCE A LOT OF SATURN OWNERS HAVE PROBLEMS WITH IT. WHY HASN'T THERE BEEN A RECALL ON THEM? *TR
No injuries · No fire · No crash
THE POWER SUNROOF ON MY 2001 SATURN SC-2 WAS MAKING A GRINDING NOISE WHEN I OPENED IT AND WHEN IT WAS CLOSING. YESTERDAY, WHILE DRIVING THE SUNROOF WAS STUCK IN THE OPEN POSITION. THE SATURN DEALER CHARGED $46.00 TO DIAGNOSE THE PROBLEM. THEY SAID IT WAS THE MOTOR AND THIS WOULD COST ABOUT $380.00 TO REPLACE. I AGREED TO THE CHARGE. THEN THEY CALLED TO SAY THE NEW MOTOR DID NOT CORRECT THE PROBLEM. THEY WANTED AN ADDITIONAL $950.00 TO REPLACE A MODULE. I TOLD THEM NOT TO DO THE WORK; THAT THE PRICE WAS TOO HIGH. THEY SAID THE CAR WAS OLD AND THIS PART ALWAYS FAILS. I ALSO REFUSED TO PAY FOR A MOTOR I DIDN'T NEED SINCE THEY MISDIAGNOSED THE PROBLEM. THIS VEHICLE HAS 56,000 MILES AND I LIVE IN MICHIGAN. THE SUNROOF IS ONLY USED A FEW MONTHS A YEAR. THIS IS A FAULTY PART. IF THIS IS A PART THAT "ALWAYS FAILS" ACCORDING TO THE DEALER SERVICE DEPARTMENT WHY HASN'T GM HAD THEM RECALLED, AND REPAIR THEM FOR FREE?
No injuries · No fire · No crash