| Components - Details | |
|---|---|
| NHTSA Complaint Number: 973292943 | Incident Date: Dec, 31 1972 |
| Consumer's City: NORTH LAS VEGAS | Consumer's State: NV |
| Vehicle Transmission Type: | Manufacturers Name: General Motors, LLC |
| Model Name: GRAND AM | Model Year: 2004 |
| Vehicle Involved in a Crash: No | Component's Description: Service brakes, air |
| Vehicle Involved in a Fire: No | Persons Injured: 0 |
| Vehicle's VIN#: | Date added to File: May, 25 2021 |
| Date Complaint Received: Aug, 11 2004 | Complaint Type: IVOQ |
| Incident Reported To Police: No | Purchase Date: - |
| Was Original Owner: No | Anti-lock Brakes: No |
| Number of Cylinders: 0 | Date of Manufacturer: - |
| Was Vehicle Towed: - | Description of the Complaints: No other manufacturer, american or foriegn, has a higher incidence of warped front rotors, and within the last decade this problem increasingly shows itself at relativey low milage. my most recent experience (last 3 years) was a new grand am se developing pulsating brakes at 20k mi. the dealer fought with us tooth & nail and said "that's your fault, we aint paying for anything!" i called the pontiac zone and raised hell, ..no cigar. finally got with the shop manager to pull the rotors & put them on the lathe and see how true they were. they weren't, but we knew that before we got started. the brake pads showed very little wear. conclusion, i got hustled out of the shop with "we'll take care of it." they did, a new brake job at no charge. the second car was a 2000 malibu. chevrolet, they said pay us for new rotors or take a hike. we hiked. replaced the brakes myself and the problem came right back around 18k mi. i sold the car instead of fixing it. my last gm car is an 04 grand am, and with just 11k mi, ...here we go again!! general motors knows of this problem. it's rampant in the product line- up. to announce a change would be strictly forbidden as a matter of corporate policy as that might draw liability leading to possible class action suits. keep in mind that brakes are a safety item not subject to limitations of warranty or liability where it can be shown that gm "knew, or should have known", that this problem exists. ergo, opened ended liability. further, gm has known of these poorly performing parts thru their dealerships and high volume replacements ordered thru the dealers and independent parts outlets. and finally, the astonishing thing about this part is that it's as low tech as it gets. it's nothing more than cast pig iron. the fix is in the metal chemistry and casting technique. where gm gets a free ride is to argue that this item is "consumable" and subject to wear and abuse beyond the manufacturers control. |
