RoadVitals

1983 Renault Alliance Recalls

Safety recall campaigns filed with NHTSA that cover this model year

Data refreshed

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.gov
Recall campaignsA safety recall is issued when a manufacturer or NHTSA determines that a vehicle has a safety-related defect or does not comply with a federal motor vehicle safety standard. Recall repairs are free. Whether a specific vehicle is covered depends on its VIN — a recall listed for a model year does not necessarily apply to every vehicle of that year.
3
Newest Apr 10, 1992
Carrying an NHTSA advisoryCampaigns where NHTSA told owners not to drive the vehicle, or to park it outside, until the repair is done.
0
Open investigationsNHTSA opens an investigation to examine whether a safety defect may exist. An open investigation is not a determination that a defect exists, and many investigations close without a recall. Investigations can, however, lead to one.
0
6 investigations on file

Recall campaigns

3 campaigns cover this model year — what the defect is, what it could cause, and what the remedy is

92V051000

VISIBILITY:DEFROSTER/DEFOGGER/HVAC SYSTEM:HEATER CORE

Apr 10, 1992
540,000 units potentially affected
The defect: THE END CAP CONNECTING THE HEAT EXCHANGER'S CORE TO THE ENGINE COOLING SYSTEM COULD RUPTURE AND ALLOW HOT COOLANT TO ESCAPE INTO THE PASSENGER COMPARTMENT.
The risk: THE COOLANT ESCAPING INTO THE PASSENGER COMPARTMENT COULDCONTACT THE DRIVER'S FEET AND INJURE THE DRIVER. ALSO, STEAM FROM THE HEATEDLIQUID WILL CLOUD ON THE WINDOW SURFACES AND IMPAIR THE DRIVER'S VISION ANDCOULD RESULT IN A VEHICLE ACCIDENT.
The remedy: REPLACE THE HEATER CORE WITH A CORE OF DIFFERENT DESIGN WHICH WILL NOT RUPTURE AND LEAK IN THE PASSENGER COMPARTMENT.
CHRYSLER CORPORATIONView on NHTSA.gov
88V060000

SEATS

Apr 8, 1988
149,000 units potentially affected
The defect: DRIVERS SEAT ADJUSTER MECHANISM MAY SEPARATE AT ITS FRONT ATTACHMENT DUE TO FATIGUE FAILURE OF THE ADJUSTER BRACKET.
The risk: FAILURE OF BOTH FRONT ATTACHMENTS MAY ALLOW SIGNIFICANTREARWARD MOVEMENT OF THE SEAT BACK.
The remedy: REPLACE DRIVERS SEAT ADJUSTER BRACKET WITH A STRONGER VERSION.
CHRYSLER CORPORATIONView on NHTSA.gov
87V049000

FUEL SYSTEM, GASOLINE:DELIVERY:HOSES, LINES/PIPING, AND FITTINGS

Apr 14, 1987
15,078 units potentially affected
The defect: FUEL HOSES (5) IN ENGINE COMPARTMENT COULD DETERIORATE OVER TIME.
The risk: FUEL LEAKAGE COULD OCCUR, RESULTING IN ENGINECOMPARTMENT FIRE.
The remedy: REPLACE FIVE FUEL HOSES/CLAMPS.
CHRYSLER CORPORATIONView on NHTSA.gov

What a recall is

Safety recall
A safety recall is issued when a manufacturer or NHTSA determines that a vehicle has a safety-related defect or does not comply with a federal motor vehicle safety standard. Recall repairs are free. Whether a specific vehicle is covered depends on its VIN — a recall listed for a model year does not necessarily apply to every vehicle of that year.
Safety investigation
NHTSA opens an investigation to examine whether a safety defect may exist. An open investigation is not a determination that a defect exists, and many investigations close without a recall. Investigations can, however, lead to one.
Manufacturer communication
Manufacturers file copies of the bulletins they send to dealers with NHTSA. These often describe diagnostic or repair procedures for a known condition. They are not recalls: repairs described in a bulletin are usually only free if the vehicle is still under warranty or the manufacturer has extended coverage.

Safety investigations

NHTSA inquiries naming this vehicle. An investigation is not a finding of a defect, and it is not a recall.

EA88015ClosedEngineering Analysis

SEAT TRACK

Opened Jan 19, 1988
Closed May 16, 1988

SUMMARY: RESULTS OF ETF TESTING SHOW THAT A FAILED SEAT TRACK CAUSES THETHE SEAT ASSEMBLY TO RECLINE UNTIL THE SEAT BACK CONTACTS THE REAR SEATCUSHION, CREATING THE POTENTIAL FOR LOSS OF VEHICLE CONTROL.ANALYSIS: THE ROCKER RECLINER SEAT MOUNTING BRACKET IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLESSEPARATES FROM THE TRACK ASSEMBLY BECAUSE OF METAL FATIGUE.AMC HAS MOD-IFIED THE SEAT TRACK DESIGN AND APPARENTLY SOLVED THE PROBLEM.RECOMMENDATION: TEST ADDITIONAL FAILED SEATS AND SEND A RECALL REQUESTLETTER.===

SEATSLed to recall 88V060000
PE88015ClosedPreliminary Evaluation

FRONT SWAY BAR SEPARATION

Opened Jan 15, 1988
Closed Jun 8, 1988

===

SUSPENSION
PE87029ClosedPreliminary Evaluation

SEAT TRACK FAILURE

Opened May 12, 1987
Closed Jan 19, 1988

SUMMARY: SINCE PE 85-060 WAS CLOSED ON 1/3/86, ODI RECEIVED 7 ADDI-TIONAL COMPLAINTS CONCERNING THIS MATTER. ONE INJURY WAS REPORTED.ODI'S IR OF 5/29/87 PROMPTED AMC TO REPORT ADDITIONAL FAILURES. ETF TEST-ING CONFIRMED THE SAFETY RELATEDNESS OF A FAILED SEAT. ODI HAS RECEIVED18 COMPLAINTS.ANALYSIS: DUE TO THE FREQUENCY AND SEVERITY OF THIS MATTER IT SHOULD BEUPGRADED TO AN EA.RECOMMENDATION: OPEN AN EA. LOCATE AND TEST MORE FAILED SEAT BACKS. SENDA RECALL REQUEST LETTER TO CHRYSLER.===

SEATS
EA86020ClosedEngineering Analysis

ENGINE COMPARTMENT FIRES

Opened Jul 2, 1986
Closed May 20, 1987

SUMMARY OF INFORMATION FROM THE MANUFACTURER:AMC HAS DETERMINED THAT1983 AND 1984 ALLIANCE AND ENCORE VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH MULTI POINT FUELINJECTION(MPFI) HAVE DEFECTIVE FUEL HOSES THAT COULD CAUSE AN ENGINE FIRE.THESE VEHICLES WERE BUILT FOR CALIF. CERTIFICATION. VEHICLE POP. 15,078.ANALYSIS:THE COMPLAINT REPORTS SHOW AN OVER INVOLVEMENT OF MPFI VEHICLES.TWELVE OF THE THIRTEEN REPORTED ENGINE FIRES ARE ON CALIF. VEHICLES . ANINDEP. INVESTIGATOR FOUND DEFECTIVE FUEL HOSES ON THREE BURNED VEHICLES.STATUS:AMC SENT NOTICE OF RECALL TO ODI ON APR 9, 1987. (RECEIVED 4/14)ALL 15,078 ALLIANCE AND ENCORE VEHICLES (MY83 AND 84) WITH MPFI WILL BEREFITTED WITH NEW FUEL HOSES AND CLAMPS. RECALL NUMBER 87V-049.PROPOSED ACTION:RECALL IS CONSISTENT WITH THE POPULATION AND THE DEFECT.RECOMMEND CLOSING INVESTIGATION.===

ENGINE AND ENGINE COOLINGLed to recall 87V049000
EA85043ClosedEngineering Analysis

UNWANTED VEHICLE ACCEL

Opened Aug 21, 1985
Closed Jul 21, 1987

SUMMARY: MANUFACTURER CLAIMS MOST REPORTS ARE A SHIFT-FLARE CONDITION OFHIGHER ENGINE SPEEDS DURING THE NO-LOAD SHIFTING TIME INTERVAL.THIS CLAIMDOES NOT APPEAR TO BE SUBSTANTIATED BY THE REPORTS.REPORTS DO NOT FOLLOWTHE TYPICAL SCENARIO OF SUDDEN ACCELERATION OCCURING WHEN THE VEHICLE ISPLACED INTO A DRIVING MODE.MANY REPORTS OCCUR WHEN SHIFTING INTO ANY GEARAT ANY SPEED.ALSO SOME REPORTS OF SEVERE ENGINE DAMAGE.ANALYSIS: ALTHOUGH THERE APPEARS TO BE A DESIGN FLAW IN THE SPEED CONTROLLOOP, MOST OF THE COMPLAINTS OCCUR AT SPEEDS WHICH ALLOW TRANSMISSION DIS-ENGAGEMENT.IN ADDITION, THIS TENDS TO BE AN INTERMITTENT TYPE OF FAILUREWHICH IS HARD TO TRACE TO A SINGLE SOURCE/CAUSE/COMPONENT, ALTHOUGH THE ISAMOTOR HAS BEEN CITED BY SEVERAL OF THE CONSUMERS AND FIELD REPRESENTATIVES.STATUS: C-MEMO DRAFT FORWARDED TO (H) 6/16/87.===

VEHICLE SPEED CONTROL:LINKAGES
DP83018ClosedDefect Petition

ENGINE STALLING, TRANS FAILURES

Opened Sep 6, 1983
Closed Jan 17, 1984

ENGINE STALLING, TRANS FAILURES

ENGINE AND ENGINE COOLING

Elsewhere on this vehicle

Data sources

Data on this page last refreshed .