Owner-reported complaints naming the fuel system system, filed with NHTSA
Data refreshed
Reports naming fuel storage or delivery — tanks, pumps, lines, injectors and fuel leaks. Every record below is an owner-reported complaint about the 2001 GMC Jimmy submitted to NHTSA — not a confirmed defect, not a recall and not a manufacturer bulletin. 8 reports on file name it.
Complaints are reports submitted by owners and drivers to NHTSA. They are not verified and do not establish that a defect exists.
Shown in the owner’s own words, exactly as filed
2001 GMC ENVOY - GAS TANK NECK LEAKING AT GROMMET. GM DOES NOT OFFER A FIX. THE COST OF REPLACING TANK WITH LABOR IS AN ABSURD $600-$800 DOLLARS. THIS SHOULD BE CAUSE FOR RECALL OF ALL SIMILAR MODELS. *TR
EVENT LEADING TO FAILURE: I WAS STUPID ENOUGH TO BUY THE LEMON IN THE FIRST PLACE. THE FAILURE (S) OCCUR ON A REGULAR BASIS. I BOUGHT THIS 2001 GMC JIMMY IN 2004. AS A CERTIFIED USED CAR. IT HAD 38,075 MILES ON IT. I DIDN'T HAVE IT A MONTH BEFORE THE LEFT FRONT WHEEL BEARING WENT OUT. SHORTLY AFTER THE POLLUTION CONTROL AIR PUMP WENT OUT. THEN IT WAS THE AIR FILTER PUMP AND HOSES TO THE REMOTE FILTER. NEXT CAME REPLACEMENT OF ALL FOUR BRAKE ROTORS. ALL OF THIS BEFORE 40,000 MILES. NEXT CAME THE FUEL PUMP(APRIL 2006).A COUPLE OF MONTHS LATER IT WAS THE FUEL PRESSURE REGULATOR AND FUEL SENSOR. THEN IT WAS REPLACING THE 2WD/ 4WD SELECTOR MODULE IN THE DASH. NEXT IN LINE WAS A NEW ALTERNATOR. LESS THAN A YEAR LATER IT WAS ANOTHER NEW ALTERNATOR,A COUPLE OF DAYS AGO IT WAS ANOTHER NEW FUEL PUMP. THERE ARE AT LEAST A DOZEN OTHER THINGS THAT WERE REPLACED. I ONLY MENTIONED THE REALLY COSTLY ITEMS. I HAVE SPENT JUST A LITTLE OVER $5000.00 ON THIS PIECE OF JUNK. CONTACTING GMC CUSTOMER COMPLAINTS IS A BIG WASTE OF TIME. I'LL NEVER BUY ANOTHER GMC ANYTHING. THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT SHOULD PULL THE PLUG AND LET GMC CLOSE DOWN FOREVER. *TR
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2001 GMC JIMMY. THE CONTACT NOTICED THAT THE ON-BOARD DIAGNOSTIC SYSTEM WARNING INDICATOR WOULD CONSISTENTLY ILLUMINATE ON THE INSTRUMENT PANEL. THE VEHICLE FREQUENTLY MISFIRED, WHICH CAUSED IT TO BE INOPERABLE. THE DEALER STATED THAT HE NEEDED TO REPLACE THE SCPI FUEL INJECTOR AND THE MASS AIR FLOW SENSORS AT THE COST OF $1,150. HE IS IN THE PROCESS OF HAVING THE VEHICLE REPAIRED. HE CALLED THE MANUFACTURER IN REFERENCE TO A VOLUNTARY RECALL FOR THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR 1996 TO 2001 SUV'S, BUT WAS NOT PROVIDED ANY ASSISTANCE BECAUSE THE RECALL WAS NOT APPLICABLE FOR HIS STATE. THE CURRENT AND FAILURE MILEAGES WERE 72,000.
FUEL GAUGE FUNCTIONS ERRATICALLY. MARKS FULL TANK OF GAS AND SOMEWHERE IN THE MID-FULL POINT THE GAUGE WILL READ WHAT EVER IT WANTS (EMPTY, 1/4, FULL...ETC.). *TR
THE GAS GAUGE WILL FREQUENTLY JUMP DOWN TO EMPTY AND LOW FUEL LIGHT COME ON. CONSTANTLY JUMPING BACK AND FORTH, EVEN WHEN IN PARK. *NM
MADE TRIP TO WORK FROM ATLANTA METRO NORTH I-285 SOUTH BELOW AIRPORT (37 MILES). SOME ROAD DEBRIS MUST HAVE PUNCTURED A HOLE IN THERMOPLASTIC FUEL TANK LEADING EDGE. SMELLED FUEL AT WORK AND TIGHTENED CAP. PARKED ON HILL AT WORK WITH LESS THAN 1/2 TANK. AFTER LUNCH WITH A CO-WORKER DISCOVERED FUEL LEAKING. VEHICLE TOWED HOME. NO LUCK WITH GM CUSTOMER SERVICE. REMOVED TANK THAT WEEK-END. AFTER DISCUSSIONS WITH COMPOSITE M&P ENGINEER AND DISTRIBUTOR BEGAN TESTS ON SEVERAL REPAIRS USING A SMALLER PLASTIC TANK. PLACED REPAIR ON FUEL TANK FOLLOWING WEEK-END USING AIRCRAFT SEALANT, 8 FIBER GLASS PLIES, AND FINAL COAT OF EPOXY RESIN. CONDUCTING SLOSHING TESTS ON SMALLER TANK WHICH ONLY HAS SEALANT OVER 9 HOLES. NO LEAKS AT 7500 CYCLES. I CONSIDER GMC JIMMY TANK AS TEMPORARY REPAIRED UNTIL MORE TESTS ARE CONDUCTED. DIGITAL PICTURES AVAILABLE AND MAY BE EMAILED. INCIDENT RESULTED IN AN UNSAFE CONDITION AND COULD HAVE LED TO FATALITIES AND CASUALTY LOSSES PEOPLE MIGHT NOT HAVE DISCOVERED SINCE IT IS DIFFICULT TO DETERMINE ROOT CAUSE AFTER A LARGE FUEL FIRE. THIS INCIDENT ALTHOUGH SOMEWHAT UNUSUAL HAPPENS OCCASIONALLY TO PLASTIC TANKS. I SPOKE TO SEVERAL PEOPLE IN MY OFFICE AWARE OF LIKE SITUATIONS. I AM DISAPPOINTED GM DID NOT USE A SHIELD TO PROTECT THE LEADING EDGE AS A MEANS TO PROTECT THE TANK FROM PUNCTURE. THE FUEL TANK REMAINS ON THE VEHICLE. IT IS EXPENSIVE TO REPLACE SINCE TANK HAS BONDED FITTINGS AND NO OTHER TANKS ARE AVAILABLE. ITS A DESIGN DEFECT. NO DOUBT MFGR MAY HAVE MET MINIMUM FMCSA PART 393 DROP REQUIREMENTS YET REQUIREMENT IS NOT ADEQUATE TO RESIST PUNCTURE LOADS FROM ROAD DEBRIS AS SHOWN THIS INSTANCE. GEICO INS ADVISED IT IS RARE BUT IT DOES HAPPEN. AS STRUCTURAL ENGINEER INVOLVED IN SAFETY DECISIONS I AM APPALLED AT DECISION NOT TO PROTECT TANK BETTER. A SMALL THIN STEEL SHEET. *JB
REGARDLESS OF HOW MUCH FUEL (I.E. FULL) THE GAS GAUGE WILL FREQUENTLY JUMP DOWN TO EMPTY AND LOW FUEL LIGHT COME ON. THIS HAPPENS IN DRIVE AND NEUTRAL ON A DAILY BASIS. CONSTANTLY JUMPING BACK AND FORTH. SOMETIMES WILL STAY ON EMPTY WHEN FULL
FUEL GAUGE FLUCTUATES BETWEEN EMTY AND FULL WHILE IN PARK OR NEUTRAL,CAN'T DEPEND ON FUEL GAGE FOR TURE INFORMATION.*AK
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.
Categories with enough reports to have a page of their own
Data on this page last refreshed .