2004 Pontiac Gto

NOTE: THE COMPLAINT AND WARRANTY COUNTS GIVEN IN THE FAILURE REPORT SUMMARY OF THIS RESUME INCLUDE ALL RECORDS RELATED TO TIRE WEAR AND WHEEL ALIGNMENT AND ARE NOT LIMITED TO TIRE-STRUT CONTACT.GENERAL MOTORS (GM) IDENTIFIED TWO CONTRIBUTORS TO PREMATURE FRONT TIRE WEAR IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.ONE OF THE CONTRIBUTORS CAUSING THE PREMATURE TIRE WEAR WAS OUT OF SPECIFICATION NEGATIVE CAMBER.GM STATED THAT EXCESSIVE NEGATIVE CAMBER COULD BE CAUSED BY IMPROPER CAMBER SETTINGS FROM THE FACTORY OR BENDING OF THE FRONT STRUT ASSEMBLIES DUE TO SHARP ROAD IMPACT (I.E., SEVERE POT HOLES).TO IMPROVE CAMBER SETTINGS FROM THE FACTORY, GM STATED THAT FROM FEBRUARY OF 2005 THROUGH MAY OF 2006 SEVERAL MODIFICATIONS WERE MADE TO THE CAMBER SETTING FIXTURE.GM ALSO NOTED THAT EXCESSIVE NEGATIVE CAMBER COULD RESULT IN FRONT TIRE TO STRUT CONTACT, WHICH COULD ALSO BE CAUSED BY USE OF NON-ORIGINAL EQUIPMENT (OE) TIRES AND/OR WHEELS.GM STATED THAT CONTACT OF THE FRONT TIRE AND FRONT STRUT ASSEMBLY CAN CAUSE A POLISHING ON THE TIRE SIDEWALL AND/OR STRUT ASSEMBLY; HOWEVER, THIS DOES NOT CAUSE A SUDDEN LOSS OF AIR. GENERAL MOTORS PROVIDED ODI WITH THE FINAL FACTORY FRONT CAMBER SETTINGS WHERE AVAILABLE FOR COMPLAINT AND WARRANTY CLAIM VEHICLES.APPROXIMATELY 90 PERCENT OF THESE VEHICLES HAD RIGHT WHEEL CAMBER SETTINGS THAT WERE OUT OF DESIGN SPECIFICATION.FOUR PERCENT OF THE VEHICLES HAD LEFT WHEEL CAMBER SETTINGS THAT WERE OUT OF SPECIFICATION.IN A REVIEW OF CONSUMER COMPLAINTS, MOST NOTED EXCESSIVE TIRE WEAR TO VARYING DEGREES TO BOTH FRONT TIRES.FOR COMPLAINTS INDICATING EXCESSIVE WEAR TO A SINGLE FRONT TIRE, 90 PERCENT INVOLVED THE RIGHT SIDE. ALTHOUGH IN SOME CASES THERE ARE INDICATIONS OF TIRE CONTACT WITH FRONT STRUT ASSEMBLIES IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES, ANALYSIS OF TIRE WEAR PATTERNS IN PHOTOGRAPHS SHOWS THE GREATEST WEAR OCCURRING ON THE INBOARD TREAD SURFACE FROM ROAD WEAR AND NOT ON THE AREA OF THE TIRE ON THE UPPER SHOULDER THAT CONTACTS THE STRUT.THIS IS CONSISTENT WITH THE KNOWN TIRE WEAR PATTERNS ASSOCIATED WITH EXCESSIVE NEGATIVE CAMBER, WITH OR WITHOUT STRUT CONTACT.THIS IS MOST APPARENT IN SOME PICTURES, WHICH SHOW MINOR TIRE-STRUT CONTACT WHILE EXHIBITING SIGNIFICANT WEAR OF THE INNER TREAD SURFACE OF THE TIRES.BASED ON DATA REVIEWED DURING THE INVESTIGATION, WHILE EXCESSIVE NEGATIVE CAMBER IS AN APPARENT ISSUE, THE PREMATURE TIRE WEAR APPEARS TO BE PRIMARILY CAUSED BY TIRE TO ROAD SURFACE CONTACT AS OPPOSED TO CONTACT OF THE FRONT TIRES TO THE FRONT STRUT ASSEMBLIES.ODI REVIEWED APPROXIMATELY 1,400 TOTAL COMPLAINTS AND WARRANTY CLAIMS POTENTIALLY RELATED TO THE ALLEGED DEFECT.VIRTUALLY ALL OF THE REPORTS RELATE TO UNEVEN/EXCESSIVE TIRE WEAR OR SOME AWARENESS OF THE TIRE-STRUT CONTACT ISSUE.ODI WAS ABLE TO IDENTIFY 9 TIRE AIR LOSS INCIDENTS ALLEGED TO BE CAUSED BY TIRE-STRUT CONTACT, WITH5 OF THESE DESCRIBING A SLOW AIR LOSS.WHILE THERE WAS EVIDENCE OF TIRE-STRUT CONTACT IN SOME OF THESE VEHICLES, ODI'S ANALYSIS DID NOT FIND THAT THIS CONTACT WAS THE CAUSE OF THE AIR LOSS BUT RATHER A SECONDARY SYMPTOM OF THE EXCESSIVE NEGATIVE CAMBER CONDITION THAT RESULTS IN RAPID ROAD WEAR ON THE INBOARD TREAD SURFACE. ODI IS AWARE OF ONE CRASH ALLEGED TO BE CAUSED BY CONTACT OF THE FRONT STRUT TO FRONT TIRE.HOWEVER, ANALYSIS OF THE INFORMATION PROVIDED BY THE CONSUMER, GM AND A THIRD PARTY INVESTIGATOR DOES NOT INDICATE THAT TIRE-STRUT CONTACT WAS A FACTOR IN THE CRASH.ODI IS UNAWARE OF ANY INJURIES OR FATALITIES ATTRIBUTED TO THE ALLEGED DEFECT. ODI HAS NOT IDENTIFIED A SAFETY RELATED DEFECT TREND IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.ACCORDINGLY, THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF TH

Evap code for gas tank cap leaking

NHTSA ID

11439263

Incident

Nov 1, 2021

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 PONTIAC GTO. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE FAN USED FOR THE AIR CONDITIONING AND THE HEATER THROUGHOUT THE VEHICLE REMAINED ACTIVATED WHEN THE VEHICLE WAS OFF OR ON. THERE WAS ALSO CONDENSATION ON THE FLOOR THROUGHOUT THE VEHICLE. THE CONTACT DID NOT KNOW WHERE THE ABNORMAL CONDENSATION ORIGINATED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT DIAGNOSED NOR REPAIRED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 152,000.

NHTSA ID

10897277

Incident

Aug 19, 2016

Mileage

152,000 mi

AFTER OWNING THE CAR LESS THAN 3 YEARS, THE SEAT BACK LATCHES STARTED STICKING SO ANYONE WHO WAS IN THE BACK SEAT HAD A HARD TIME GETTING OUT OR GETTING IN FOR THAT MATTER! AFTER A TIME THE LATCHES STOPPED WORKING ALTOGETHER SO IT BECAME IMPOSSIBLE TO GET PEOPLE OUT OF THE BACK SEAT IF THEY WERE ABLE TO GET IN. THE POWER SEATS HAD TO BE MOVED ALL THE WAY FORWARD, JUST TO GIVE A SMALL SPACE FOR PASSENGERS TO SQUEEZE OUT. IN A CRASH, IT WOULD BE IMPOSSIBLE TO GET SOMEONE OUT OF THE BACK SEAT BECAUSE OF THIS PROBLEM WHICH COULD RESULT IN HARM. WE WERE TOLD THAT THIS WAS NOT COVERED UNDER THE WARRANTY SO IT STILL REMAINS AN ISSUE WITH THE CAR AS THE WARRANTY HAS EXPIRED. ALL THIS OCCURRED WHILE THE CAR WAS STATIONARY.

NHTSA ID

10789160

Incident

Sep 18, 2006

WAS DRIVING CAR ON THE FREEWAY AT APROX 75 MPH HIT A PATCH OF ICE AND LOST CONTROL SPUN OUT IN CIRCLES, HITTING THE GUARD RAIL CAUSING IT TO ROLL 3 TIMES CAR ENDED UPSIDE DOWN I HIT STEERING WHEEL AND SERIOUSLY HURT MY BACK NO AIR BAGS DEPLOYED. *TR

NHTSA ID

10653754

Incident

Jan 8, 2010

Mileage

36,709 mi

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 PONTIAC GTO. AFTER STARTING THE VEHICLE AND SHIFTING INTO THE DRIVE POSITION, THE ENGINE SUDDENLY STALLED. THE INTERMITTENT FAILURE OCCURRED ON MULTIPLE OCCASIONS. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC WHO DIAGNOSED THAT THE IGNITION SWITCH WAS FAULTY AND NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED, BUT THE FAILURE RECURRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 103,000.

NHTSA ID

10622201

Incident

Aug 1, 2014

Mileage

103,000 mi

WHILE DOING A SPRINGTIME CHECK OF MY GTO, NOTICED COIL COVER RUBBING ON FUEL RAIL FEED LINE. ABRASION WAS ALMOST ALL THE WAY THROUGH THE LINE. HAD TO REPLACE WITH STEEL BRAIDED LINE FROM RUSSELS. COULD HAVE CAUSED FIRE IN THE ENGINE BAY. *TR

NHTSA ID

10609945

Incident

Apr 1, 2013

Mileage

45,000 mi

THE SEATBELT RETRACTOR FIRST FAILED IN AUGUST OF 2013. I RESEARCHED ONLINE AND FOUND THAT MANY OTHER 04 GTO OWNERS HAVE HAD THE SAME PROBLEM. I FIXED THE PART THAT COMMONLY SLIPS OUT OF PLACE CAUSING THE ISSUE AND THE SEATBELT ONCE AGAIN WORKED CORRECTLY. HOWEVER, NOW ON JULY 2ND 2014 AT ONLY 39,500 MILES THE SEATBELT RETRACTOR AGAIN FAILED LEAVING THE BELT FULLY EXTENDED. THIS MAKES THE VEHICLE EXTREMELY UNSAFE AND NOT DRIVABLE AS THE BELT WILL PROVIDE NO RESTRAINT IN THE EVENT OF AN ACCIDENT. IT IS MY OPINION WITH A LOT OF EXPERIENCE IN VEHICLE REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE THAT THIS IS A POOR AND UNSAFE DESIGN TO BEGIN WITH. FORTUNATELY FOR ME I DISCOVERED THIS ISSUE BOTH TIMES WHEN PARKED AND NOT DRIVING, BUT IF THIS FAILURE WERE TO OCCUR RIGHT BEFORE OR DURING A COLLISION THERE WOULD BE SERIOUS HARM DONE AS THE SEATBELT WOULD EFFECTIVELY DO NOTHING. THE SPRING FOR THE BELT INSIDE THE RETRACTOR MECHANISM IS HELD IN PLACE BY PLASTIC PARTS, WHICH IS CLEARLY A CHEAP CORNER CUTTING MOVE AND HAS LEFT THE SEATBELTS IN ALL OF THESE CARS IN A DELICATE AND UNSAFE STATE. I WILL BE CONTACTING A GENERAL MOTORS DEALERSHIP TO ASK IN THEY WILL COVER THIS REPAIR AS THERE IS NO CURRENT RECALL, BUT THIS IS CLEARLY A SAFETY ISSUE THAT SHOULD NOT BE HAPPENING. *TR

NHTSA ID

10607948

Incident

Aug 1, 2013

Mileage

32,000 mi

WE HAVE OWNED 2 2004 GTO'S AND THIS ISSUE HAS HAPPENED TO BOTH VEHICLES AND THE VIN NUMBER LISTED ABOVE IT HAS NOW HAPPENED TWICE. THE KEY WILL NOT WORK AND UNLOCK THE STEERING COLUMN THEREFORE THE CAR WILL NOT CRANK... THERE IS NO WARNING THAT THIS WILL HAPPEN AND HAS LEFT US STRANDED ON 3 SEPARATE OCCASIONS. WHEN I CONTACTED PONTIAC (GM) ABOUT THIS ISSUE THEY INITIALLY SEEMED CONCERNED BUT NOW AFTER COUNTLESS CALLS AND EMAILS THEY ARE NOT RESPONDING. THEY HAVE EVEN ISSUED A SERVICE REQUEST: 71-1312795897 NUMBER WHICH APPARENTLY DOESN'T MEAN ANYTHING BECAUSE THEY ARE DOING NOTHING TO INVESTIGATE THE ISSUE TO VERIFY THAT THIS ISSUE ISN'T A DEFAULT IN THE CAR. AS I AM AWARE THAT THIS ISSUE HAS BEEN REPORTED TO THEM MULTIPLE TIMES ON THESE CARS SPECIFICALLY AND THEY REFUSE TO ACKNOWLEDGE AND RECALL THE ISSUE. MY REQUEST IS FOR THEM TO INVESTIGATE AND WE ARE CURRENTLY HAVING THE ISSUE SO WE HAVE A PERFECT CASE FOR THEM TO HAVE A GM DEALER LOOK AT AND SAY IF THIS A FLAW IN THE STEERING AND IGNITION COLUMN... [XXX] INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6). *TR

NHTSA ID

10598473

Incident

Mar 14, 2014

Mileage

70,000 mi

This PI communicates the requirement to provide a pico file to receive diagnostic assistance from TAC.

This Preliminary Information communication provides information to the technician about changing the tire and wheel size on vehicles. General Motors will only support a tire calibration for tires that have been sized, tested and designed for the vehicle in question and its applications. Technician should not use the information that is provided by the antilock braking system tire size selection.

Vehicle Wide Programming (VWP) is a new process to update software on GM Vehicles. It provides the ability via a single selection within Techline Connect to first identify which modules need updating and then proceed to updating affected modules (with some exceptions). The updating of modules is completed in parallel instead of the technician needing to update one module at a time. This allows a more streamlined approach for dealers and customers.

This bulletin provides information for use on a Product Assistance Claim (PAC), which is formerly known as a Product Allegation Resolution (PAR) claim.

This service bulletin provides information for dealers/technicians on Service Programming System (SPS) Error Codes E4398, E4399, E4401, E4403, M4404, M4413, M6954, M6955, E4414, E4423, E4491, E4492, or E6961 and resolution information.

This Warranty Administration bulletin provides retail and wholesale service personnel with the policies/procedures and the warranty transaction submission procedures that support the Personal Property Damage process.