2002 Hyundai Sonata Recalls

THE MANUFACTURER HAS ISSUED A SAFETY RECALL NOTIFICATION AS A RESULT OF THIS INVESTIGATION.THE RECALL AFFECTS 91,202 MY 2002-2003 SUBJECT VEHICLES PRODUCED FROM JANUARY 28, 2002, THROUGH MARCH 22, 2003.THE VEHICLE RECALL POPULATION WAS DEFINED BY THE MANUFACTURER'S USE OF A NEW SUPPLIER FOR THE CHROME PLATING PROCESS BEGINNING IN JANUARY 2002, AND A PRODUCTION CHANGE IN MARCH 2003 TO IMPROVE ADHESION OF THE PLATING TO THE DOOR HANDLE.VEHICLES BEING RECALLED REPRESENT 59 PERCENT OF THE TOTAL MY 2002-2003 PRODUCTION, BUT ACCOUNT FOR 91 PERCENT OF THE CONSUMER COMPLAINTS RECEIVED.THE PROCESS CHANGE FOR MY 2002 VEHICLES RESULTED IN A DRAMATIC INCREASE IN COMPLAINTS (1200 PERCENT ON A PER UNIT RATE BASIS).MY 2003 VEHICLES BUILT AFTER MARCH 2003 PRODUCTION CHANGE SHOWED A SIMILAR DECLINE IN THE COMPLAINT RATE.BASED ON THE MANUFACTURER'S ACTION, THIS INVESTIGATION HAS BEEN CLOSED.

IN A LETTER DATED APRIL 14, 2009, HYUNDAI-KIA AMERICA TECHNICAL CENTER, INC (HYUNDAI) NOTIFIED NHTSA THAT HYUNDAIIS CONDUCTING A SAFETY RECALL OF MODEL YEAR (MY) 1999 THROUGH 2004 HYUNDAI SONATA VEHICLES MANUFACTURED PRIOR TO NOVEMBER 20, 2003 THAT ARE REGISTERED AND OPERATED IN THE FOLLOWING SALT BELT STATES AND THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA: CONNECTICUT, DELAWARE, ILLINOIS, INDIANA, IOWA, MAINE, MARYLAND, MASSACHUSETTS, MICHIGAN, MINNESOTA, MISSOURI, NEW HAMPSHIRE, NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK, OHIO, PENNSYLVANIA, RHODE ISLAND, VERMONT, WEST VIRGINIA, AND WISCONSIN.HYUNDAI IS RECALLING THE VEHICLES TO REMEDY A CONDITION WHERE INTERNAL CORROSION OF THE FRONT SUBFRAME MAY LEAD TO SEPARATION OF THE LOWER CONTROL ARM AT THE FORWARD MOUNTING POINT AND/OR SEPARATION OF THE AXLE FROM THE TRANSAXLE.THIS COULD RESULT IN A LOSS OF VEHICLE CONTROL AND/OR VEHICLE DISABLEMENT. THE SUBFRAMES WILL BE INSPECTED IN THE RECALLED VEHICLES USING A PROCEDURE DEVELOPED BY HYUNDAI TO MEASURE METAL THICKNESS.PARTS WITH PERFORATIONS FROM CORROSION OR WITH METAL BELOW THE SPECIFIED THICKNESS WILL BE REPLACED WITH REDESIGNED SUBFRAMES.IF THE MINIMUM METAL THICKNESS IS MET, DRAINAGE HOLES AND RUST PROOFING MATERIAL WILL BE ADDED TO THE EXISTING SUBFRAME. ODI'S ANALYSIS OF COMPLAINT DATA REVEALED THAT 98% OF THE CONSUMER COMPLAINTS WERE FROM VEHICLES EITHER ORIGINALLY SOLD OR OPERATED IN SALTBELT STATES. SIMILARLY 99.7% OF THE WARRANTY CLAIMS WERE FROM VEHICLES ORIGINALLY SOLD OR OPERATED IN SALTBELT STATES.ODI IDENTIFIED 105 REPORTS OF LOWER CONTROL ARM DETACHMENT AND/OR AXLE SEPARATION FROM THE TRANSAXLE THROUGH ANALYSIS OF WARRANTY AND COMPLAINT INFORMATION AND CONSUMER INTERVIEWS.ONE HUNDRED THREE (103) OF THE 105 INCIDENTS INVOLVED VEHICLES IN STATES COVERED BY THE RECALL.IN ADDITION TO THE SUBJECT VEHICLES, HYUNDAI ALSO NOTED IN THE APRIL 14, 2009 LETTER THAT MY 2001 THROUGH 2004 XG300 AND XG350 WERE ALSO BEING RECALLED AS THEY WERE MANUFACTURED WITH SUBFRAMES SIMILAR IN DESIGN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.BASED ON HYUNDAI'S DECISION TO CONDUCT A SAFETY RECALL THIS ENGINEERING ANALYSIS IS CLOSED.

THE OFFICE OF DEFECTS INVESTIGATION (ODI) OPENED PRELIMINARY EVALUATION, PE08-029, ON APRIL 22, 2008, BASED ON 40 CONSUMER COMPLAINTS ALLEGING FRONT SUB-FRAME CORROSION IN MODEL YEAR (MY) 1999 THROUGH 2002 HYUNDAI SONATA VEHICLES.COMPLAINTS DESCRIBE SEVERE CORROSION OF THE VEHICLE SUB-FRAME IN THE AREA WHERE THE RIGHT-FRONT LOWER CONTROL ARM IS ATTACHED.IN SOME VEHICLES, SUB-FRAME CORROSION HAS CAUSED COMPLETE OR PARTIAL DETACHMENT OF THE CONTROL ARM, RESULTING IN WHEEL COLLAPSE OR SEPARATION. IN RESPONSE TO ODI'S INFORMATION REQUEST LETTER FOR PE08-029, HYUNDAI PROVIDED OWNER COMPLAINTS, FIELD REPORTS, AND WARRANTY CLAIM DATA FOR APPROXIMATELY 197,906 MY 1999 THROUGH 2002 SUBJECT VEHICLES SOLD OR LEASED IN THE UNITED STATES.THE BASE WARRANTY FOR THE SUBJECT VEHICLES IS 60 MONTHS OR 60,000 MILES, WHICHEVER OCCURS FIRST.ACCORDING TO HYUNDAI, PROLONGED EXPOSURE TO THE ROAD SALTS MAY RESULT IN CORROSIVE DAMAGE TO THE SUBFRAME.HYUNDAI REDESIGNED THE SUB-FRAME EARLY IN THE MY 2004 PRODUCTION (NOVEMBER 2003) TO ADDRESS PROBLEMS WITH PREMATURE CORROSION OF THE CROSSMEMBER NEAR THE RIGHT-FRONT SUSPENSION ATTACHMENT. ODI'S ANALYSIS OF BOTH COMPLAINT AND WARRANTY DATA FOR THE MY 1999 THROUGH 2002 SONATA VEHICLES SHOWS THAT THE FAILURE RATES ARE SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER IN SALT BELT STATES, WHICH ACCOUNT FOR APPROXIMATELY 50 PERCENT OF VEHICLE SALES AND OVER 90 PERCENT OFCOMPLAINTS AND WARRANTY CLAIMS RELATED TO THE ALLEGED DEFECT (NOTE:FOR PURPOSES OF THIS INVESTIGATION THE SALT BELT INCLUDES CONNECTICUT, DELAWARE, THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, ILLINOIS, INDIANA, IOWA, MAINE, MARYLAND, MASSACHUSETTS, MICHIGAN, MINNESOTA, MISSOURI, NEW HAMPSHIRE, NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK, OHIO, PENNSYLVANIA, RHODE ISLAND, VERMONT, WEST VIRGINIA AND WISCONSIN).ACCORDING TO HYUNDAI, THE ALLEGED DEFECT RESULTS IN A PROGRESSIVE LOSS OF STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY OF THE SUBFRAME AND THERE IS AMPLE OPPORTUNITY FOR THE PROBLEM TO BE DETECTED (BY INSPECTION, STEERING FEEL OR TIRE WEAR ANOMALIES) AND REPAIRED BEFORE IT REACHES A STATE WHERE A SAFETY RELATED INCIDENT MAY OCCUR.HYUNDAI IDENTIFIED 4 ALLEGATIONS OF VEHICLE DISABLEMENT AND 1 ALLEGATION OF A CRASH; WHERE THE LOWER CONTROL ARM BROKE FROM THE VEHICLE WHILE DRIVING AT 55 MPH AND THE DRIVER LOST CONTROL AND DROVE INTO A YARD.THERE WERE NO REPORTED INJURIES.ODI RECEIVED A SEPARATE ALLEGATION OF A CRASH, WHERE THE COMPLAINANT ALLEGED THAT WHILE DRIVING AROUND A SLIGHT CURVE AT 65 MPH ON A FREEWAY, THE VEHICLE SUB-FRAME FRACTURED AND THE DRIVER LOST CONTROL OF THE VEHICLE AND WENT OFF THE ROAD.AGAIN, NO INJURIES WERE REPORTED.APPROXIMATELY ONE-THIRD OF THE COMPLAINTS TO ODI ALLEGE THAT THE SUB-FRAME CORROSION RESULTED IN A LOSS OF CONTROL AND/OR A VEHICLE DISABLEMENT DUE TO WHEEL COLLAPSE OR SEPARATION.THIS INVESTIGATION HAS BEEN UPGRADED TO AN ENGINEERING ANALYSIS (EA08-016) COVERING MY 1999 THROUGH EARLY-2004 HYUNDAI SONATA VEHICLES IN SALT-BELT STATES AND EQUIPPED WITH THE SUBJECT SUB-FRAME DESIGN TO FURTHER ASSESS THE FREQUENCY AND SAFETY CONSEQUENCES OF THE ALLEGED DEFECT.

THE OFFICE OF DEFECTS INVESTIGATION (ODI) OPENED A PRELIMINARY EVALUATION (PE), PE05-059, BASED ON NINE CONSUMER COMPLAINTS OF TIRE VALVE STEM FAILURES.THE ALLEGED VALVE STEM FAILURES OCCURRED ONLY AFTER TIRE REPLACEMENT FROM THE ORIGINAL EQUIPMENT (OE) TIRE (MICHELIN 205/65R15 ENERGY MXV4 PLUS) TO A NON-OE? AFTERMARKET TIRE.NINETY-EIGHT PERCENT OF THE AFTERMARKET TIRES ALLEGED TO BE ASSOCIATED WITH THE TIRE VALVE STEM FAILURES WERE DETERMINED TO BE AFTERMARKET TIRES PRODUCED BY BRANDS OF MICHELIN GROUP (BF GOODRICH AND UNIROYAL).MICHELIN ISSUED A TECHNICAL BULLETIN ON SEPTEMBER 15, 2005 MAKING RETAILERS AWARE OF A POTENTIAL WHEEL COVER INCOMPATIBILITY WITH BF GOODRICH TRACTION T/AAND TOURING T/A PRO SERIES TIRES THAT COULD CAUSE WHEEL COVER MOVEMENT AND IN EXTREME CASES TIRE VALVE DAMAGE. MICHELIN HAS, ADDITIONALLY, REDESIGNED THE BF GOODRICH AND UNIROYAL TIRES ALLEGEDLY ASSOCIATED WITH THE VALVE STEM FAILURES, AS OF THE FIRST QUARTER OF CALENDAR YEAR 2006. THE PREVIOUS DESIGN VERSION OF BOTH TIRES IS NO LONGER AVAILABLE.NO COMPLAINTS HAVE BEEN SUBMITTED TO ODI FOR TIRES MANUFACTURED AFTER THE INTRODUCTION OF THE REDESIGNED TIRES.THERE HAVE BEEN NO ACCIDENTS, INJURIES OR LOSS OF VEHICLE CONTROL ATTRIBUTED TO THE ALLEGED DEFECT.ACCORDINGLY, THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT DOES NOT EXIST.THE AGENCY WILL CONTINUE TO MONITOR COMPLAINTS AND OTHER INFORMATION RELATING TO THE ALLEGED DEFECT IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES AND TAKE FURTHER ACTION IN THE FUTURE IF WARRANTED.