EQUIPMENT
1985 Chevrolet G30
Recalls, owner-reported complaints, investigations and safety data
Overview
Our database contains no NHTSA owner-reported complaints for the 1985 Chevrolet G30. 3 safety recalls have been issued covering this model year; and 4 NHTSA investigations name it.
Complaints are reports submitted by owners and drivers to NHTSA. They are not verified and do not establish that a defect exists.
Safety recalls
3 campaigns cover this model year
Recalls apply to specific vehicles, not to every vehicle of a model year. Check your VIN with NHTSA or your manufacturer's dealer to confirm whether a recall affects your vehicle.
Check a VIN on NHTSA.govSUSPENSION:FRONT:CONTROL ARM:LOWER ARM
SUSPENSION:FRONT:CONTROL ARM:LOWER ARM
Safety investigations
NHTSA inquiries naming this vehicle. An investigation is not a finding of a defect.
HIGH TEMP & FUEL EXP
There is no summary currently available
LOWER CONTROL ARM
SUMMARY OF INFORMATION FROM MANUFACTURER:MANUFACTURER IS IN RECEIPT OFONE COMPLAINT AND FIVE FIELD REPORTS.PRODUCT REPORT ANALYSIS STATES THELOWER CONTROL ARM FROM WAGGONER CORPORATION APPEARS TO HAVE A SMALL RADIUSAT THE TRANSITION OF THE SIDE WALL TO THE BALL STUD NOSE.CURRENT STAMPINGSOURCE, S.K.D., ALSO HAS A SMALL RADIUS IN THE SAME AREA.S.K.D. HASCHANGED THE TRIM TO INCREASE THE RADIUS TO 1 INCH AND PROVIDE ADDITIONALSTRENGTH IN THE BALL STUD AREA.ANALYSIS:FAILURE DATA INDICATES THE LEFT CONTROL ARM AND DIESEL ENGINEAPPLICATION ARE OVER REPRESENTED.ALL KNOWN FAILURES HAVE OCCURRED AT LOWSPEEDS, OR HAVE BEEN LOCATED AS A RESULT OF AN INCREASE IN THE FREQUENCY OFMAINTENANCE INSPECTIONS.BALL JOINT SEPARATION COULD RESULT IN COLLAPSE OFFRONT WHEEL SUSPENSION AND LOSS OF VEHICLE CONTROL.ACTION: IR TO GM SENT 11/19/87 CONTACT FLEET OWNERS.===
LOWER CONTROL ARM FAILURE
SUMMARY OF INFORMATION FROM MANUFACTURER:MANUFACTURER IS IN RECEIPT OFONE COMPLAINT AND FIVE FIELD REPORTS.PRODUCT REPORT ANALYSIS STATES THELOWER CONTROL ARM FROM WAGGONER CORPORATION APPEARS TO HAVE A SMALL RADIUSAT THE TRANSITION OF THE SIDE WALL TO THE BALL STUD NOSE.CURRENT STAMPINGSOURCE, S.K.D., ALSO HAS A SMALL RADIUS IN THE SAME AREA.S.K.D. HASCHANGED THE TRIM TO INCREASE THE RADIUS TO 1 INCH AND PROVIDE ADDITIONALSTRENGTH IN THE BALL STUD AREA.ANALYSIS:DATA INDICATES 38 OF 40 FAILURES INVOLVE THE LEFT CONTROL ARM,39 OF THE VEHICLES ARE POWERED BY THE DIESEL ENGINE.ALL FAILURES HAVEOCCURRED AT LOW SPEEDS, OR HAVE BEEN LOCATED DURING INCREASED FREQUENCYMAINTENANCE INSPECTIONS.SEPARATION OF THE BALL JOINT FROM THE CONTROLARM COULD CAUSE ONE SIDE OF THE FRONT WHEEL SUSPENSION TO COLLAPSE,POSSIBLY RESULTING IN LOSS OF VEHICLE CONTROL.PROPOSED ACTION:UPGRADE THIS PE TO AN EA.===
EXHAUST SYSTEM HEAT
SUMMARY OF INFORMATION FROM MANUFACTURER:ANALYSIS OF THE 65 COMPLAINTSFORWARDED BY GM ON THIS ISSUE REVEALS THAT 15 OF THE COMPLAINTS MAY BESAFETY RELATED.COMPLAINTS IDENTIFYING THE PROBLEM AS A RED HOT EXHAUSTSYSTEM OR MUFFLER FAILURE WERE NOT COUNTED.GM ALSO INCLUDED NUMEROUSCOMPLAINTS PERTAINING TO FUEL EXPULSION IN THE MOTOR HOME CHASSIS.THEYWERE NOT COUNTED SINCE THAT PROBLEM IS ALREADY UNDER INVESTIGATION.CONCERNING BRUSH FIRES RESULTING FROM THE HIGH EXHAUST TEMPERATURES, GMSTATESOUR FIELD EXPERIENCE, AS EVIDENCED BY THE LOW NUMBER OF REPORTSPERTAINING TO THE EXHAUST TEMPERATURE, INDICATES TO US THAT OUR CUSTOMERSARE OBSERVING THE PRECAUTIONS CONTAINED IN OUR OWNER'S MANUAL AND AREEXERCISING THE NECESSARY PRECAUTIONS.ANALYSIS:THE ALLEGED DEFECT ORIGINATES WITH THE GENERATION OF HEAT IN THEEXHAUST SYSTEM.HIGHER EXHAUST TEMPERATURES ARE OCCURRING AS A RESULT OFSTRINGENT ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY (EPA) REQUIREMENTS WHICH WENTINTO EFFECT IN 1985 FOR VEHICLES WITH A GVW IN EXCESS OF 8,500 LBS.THEHIGHER EXHAUST TEMPERATURES CAN LEAD TO EXCESSIVE UNDERBODY TEMPERATURESWHICH MAY RESULT IN FUEL SYSTEM PRESSURIZATION AND A HIGHER POTENTIAL FORTHE EXPULSION OF LIQUID FUEL UPON REMOVAL OF THE FUEL TANK FILLER CAP.INADDITION, OTHER SIDE EFFECTS SUCH AS SMOLDERING ITEMS IN PICK UP BEDS,BURNT TIRES AND MUDFLAPS HAVE BEEN REPORTED.PROPOSED ACTION:UPGRADE THIS PE TO AN EA.SINCE SOME MODELS ARE ALREADYBEING INVESTIGATED, AND COMPLAINT DATA IS SPARSE ON OTHER MODELS, THE NEWEA SHOULD BE DIRECTED ONLY TO VEHICLE MODELS C AND K WHICH UTILIZE THEHEAVY DUTY (VEHICLES WITH A GVW IN EXCESS OF 8,500 LBS) EMISSION SYSTEM.===
Recent owner complaints
Reports submitted to NHTSA, shown in the owner's own words
No owner complaints recorded for this model year
Either none have been filed with NHTSA, or this vehicle is too new for reports to have accumulated.
Compare model years
Complaint and recall counts across every year of this model
| Year | Complaints | Recalls | Investigations | Issue Index |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2002 | 1 | 0 | 0 | — |
| 2001 | 4 | 0 | 0 | — |
| 1999 | 2 | 0 | 0 | — |
| 1998 | 3 | 1 | 0 | — |
| 1997 | 4 | 1 | 0 | — |
| 1996 | 7 | 6 | 0 | — |
| 1995 | 21 | 4 | 0 | 55.6 |
| 1994 | 6 | 3 | 0 | — |
| 1993 | 5 | 3 | 0 | — |
| 1992 | 2 | 5 | 0 | — |
| 1991 | 0 | 3 | 0 | — |
| 1990 | 5 | 3 | 0 | — |
| 1989 | 2 | 3 | 0 | — |
| 1988 | 1 | 2 | 1 | — |
| 1987 | 0 | 3 | 4 | — |
| 1986 | 0 | 3 | 4 | — |
| 1985Viewing | 0 | 3 | 4 | — |
| 1984 | 0 | 3 | 2 | — |
| 1983 | 1 | 2 | 0 | — |
| 1982 | 1 | 1 | 0 | — |
| 1981 | 0 | 1 | 0 | — |
| 1980 | 0 | 1 | 0 | — |
| 1979 | 0 | 2 | 0 | — |
| 1978 | 0 | 2 | 0 | — |
| 1977 | 0 | 3 | 0 | — |
| 1976 | 0 | 3 | 0 | — |
| 1975 | 0 | 2 | 0 | — |
| 1974 | 0 | 2 | 0 | — |
| 1973 | 0 | 1 | 0 | — |
| 1971 | 0 | 1 | 0 | — |
Higher-selling and older vehicles accumulate more reports. Counts are not failure rates and are not directly comparable between vehicles that sold in very different numbers. Older model years have had longer for reports to accumulate.