2003 Saturn Ion Recalls

INVESTIGATION DISCLOSED THAT THE MANUFACTURER ISSUED A SERVICE BULLETIN IN AUGUST 2003, REGARDING SERVICE THAT REQUIRED REMOVAL OF THE WIPER ARMS.GM ISSUED THE BULLETIN AT THAT TIME TO ADDRESS CUSTOMER COMMENTS ON WINDSHIELD WIPER CHATTERING OR HOPPING ACROSS THE WINDSHIELD DURING WIPER OPERATION.THE CORRECTION WAS TO REPLACE THE WIPER ARM AND BLADE.HOWEVER, THE BULLETIN DID NOT PLACE SPECIFIC EMPHASIS ON THE IMPORTANCE OF USING THE PROPER TOOL AND PROCEDURES TO REMOVE THE WIPER ARM AND TO PREVENT DAMAGE TO THE PIVOT SHAFT HOUSING.IN GM'S RESPONSE TO ODI'S INFORMATION REQUEST LETTER, GM STATES, ...THE WIPER PIVOT HOUSING IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLE MAY CRACK AND/OR FRACTURE AS A RESULT OF AN OVERLOAD CONDITION APPLIED TO THE WIPER PIVOT HOUSING DURING IMPROPER REMOVAL OF THE WIPER ARMS.GM'S FIELD SURVEY FOUND THAT ...DEALERS DO NOT ROUTINELY USE THE WIPER ARM REMOVAL TOOL WHEN SERVICING THE WIPER ARMS.ODI CONCLUDES THAT THE FAILURE AND WARRANTY REPORTS IN THIS INVESTIGATION DO NOT IDENTIFY A SAFETY RELATED DEFECT TREND.ODI DOES HAVE CONCERN, HOWEVER, THAT PRIOR AND IMPROPERLY PERFORMED WIPER ARM REMOVAL MAY HAVE CONTRIBUTED TO THE FAILURES IDENTIFIED DURING THIS INVESTIGATION.IN AUGUST 2007, GM ISSUED A NEW TECHNICAL SERVICE BULLETIN (GM NUMBER 07-08-43-007) TO SPECIFICALLY EMPHASIZE THE IMPORTANCE OF USING THE PROPER TOOL FOR REMOVAL OF THE WIPER ARMS TO PREVENT PIVOT SHAFT DAMAGE DURING THE PROCEDURE.THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED.

ON DECEMBER 12, 2005, ODI RECEIVED A DEFECT PETITION (DP05-008) REQUESTING THE INVESTIGATION OF TIMING CHAIN FAILURES THAT COULD CAUSE STALLING IN SATURN VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH THE 2.2L (L61) ENGINE. ODI OPENED PE06-006 ON JANUARY 24, 2006, WITH 24 VEHICLE OWNER COMPLAINTS THAT ALLEGED A BROKEN TIMING CHAIN CAUSED THE VEHICLE TO STOP OPERATING.ON APRIL 12, 2006, ODI RECEIVED INFORMATION FROM GENERAL MOTORS (GM) CONCERNING TIMING CHAIN FAILURES IN APPROXIMATELY 412,000 MODEL YEAR (MY) 2000 THROUGH 2003 SATURN L-SERIES AND ION VEHICLES WITH 2.2L ENGINES. GM'S RESPONSE INCLUDED 1,020 OWNER COMPLAINTS AND FIELD REPORTS CONCERNING TIMING CHAIN FAILURE, INCLUDING 228 THAT ALLEGED THE FAILURE CAUSED THE VEHICLE TO STALL WHILE DRIVING.GM ALSO PROVIDED WARRANTY CLAIM DATA THAT SHOWED 1,902 SUBJECT VEHICLES RECEIVING TIMING CHAIN REPAIRS, INCLUDING 261 WHICH INDICATED THAT A STALL WHILE DRIVING RESULTED FROM THE FAILURE.THE GM COMPLAINTS, FIELD REPORTS AND WARRANTY CLAIMS THAT DID NOT CONTAIN SUFFICIENT INFORMATION TO DETERMINE THAT A STALL WHILE DRIVING OCCURRED WERE PROVIDED IN THE CATEGORY OTHER.GM STATED THAT THE MAJORITY OF THESE INCIDENTS PROBABLY OCCURRED WHILE THE VEHICLES WERE PARKED SINCE THE TIMING CHAIN IS MORE LIKELY TO BREAK DURING HIGH CHAIN LOAD SITUATIONS, SUCH AS ENGINE STARTUP.GM'S DATA SHOWED ELEVATED FAILURE RATES IN APPROXIMATELY 20,500 MY 2001 L-SERIES VEHICLES PRODUCED DURING A FOUR MONTH PERIOD FROM NOVEMBER 2000 THROUGH FEBRUARY 2001.OVER ONE-THIRD OF GM'S TOTAL COMPLAINTS AND FIELD REPORTS (34.3%) AND WARRANTY CLAIMS (38.2%) INVOLVED L-SERIES VEHICLES BUILT DURING THE 4-MONTH PERIOD, WHICH ARE ONLY ABOUT 5% OF SUBJECT VEHICLE PRODUCTION.THE TIMING CHAIN FAILURE RATE IN THE VEHICLES BUILT DURING THIS RANGE IS OVER 10 TIMES GREATER THAN THE REMAINING SUBJECT VEHICLE POPULATION. FOR THE MY 2001 L-SERIES VEHICLES BUILT DURING THE 4-MONTH PERIOD, THE 36-MONTH FAILURE RATE FOR REPAIRS INVOLVING STALL WHILE DRIVING IS SLIGHTLY UNDER ONE PERCENT.HOWEVER, IF THE INCIDENTS CODED AS OTHER ARE ADDED, THE 36-MONTH FAILURE RATE RISES TO NEARLY FIVE PERCENT FOR THOSE VEHICLES.ODI AND GM ARE CONTINUING TO ASSESS THE NUMBER OF COMPLAINTS AND WARRANTY CLAIMS CODED BY GM AS OTHER THAT INVOLVE INCIDENTS OF STALL WHILE DRIVING.GM'S STATISTICAL MODELING OF THE FAILURE DATA INITIALLY CONCLUDED THAT THE FAILURE RATES WERE DECLINING WITH AGE AND MILEAGE FOR ANY SET OF WARRANTY DATA ANALYZED (E.G., STALL WHILE DRIVING, OTHER OR COMBINED).HOWEVER, SUBSEQUENT ANALYSIS SHOWED THAT THE FAILURE RATES ARE INCREASING. BASED ON THE HIGH COMPLAINT AND WARRANTY RATES FOR TIMING CHAIN FAILURE IN THE 4-MONTH PRODUCTION PERIOD FOR THE MY 2001 L-SERIES VEHICLES, THIS INVESTIGATION HAS BEEN UPGRADED TO AN ENGINEERING ANALYSIS TO FURTHER ASSESS THE FREQUENCY OF STALL INCIDENTS DUE TO TIMING CHAIN FAILURES IN THOSE VEHICLES (EA06-009).

ANALYSIS UNDERTAKEN IN RESPONSE TO THE PETITION IDENTIFIED 26 COMPLAINTS ALLEGING TIMING CHAIN FAILURES IN MY 2000-2003 SATURN L-SERIES VEHICLE EQUIPPED WITH THE 2.2L L4 ENGINE.MOST COMPLAINTS OF TIMING CHAIN FAILURE REPORTEDLY RESULTED IN A SUDDEN LOSS OF ENGINE POWER AND STALLING.ODI ALSO NOTED THAT CERTAIN MY 2002-2003 SATURN VUE AND MY 2003 SATURN ION MODEL VEHICLES WITH THE 2.2L ENGINE VEHICLESCOVERED BY A TECHNICAL SERVICE BULLETIN (03-06-01-017) THAT ADDRESSED TIMING CHAIN DESIGN AND SERVICE PROCEDURE CHANGES, EXHIBITED NO COMPLAINTS OF TIMING CHAIN FAILURE.ODI WILL GRANT THE PETITION AND OPEN A PRELIMINARY EVALUATION TO ASSESS THE FREQUENCY, TREND, SCOPE AND SAFETY CONSEQUENCES ASSOCIATED WITH THE ALLEGED DEFECT IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.REFER TO PE06-006.

THE COMBINATION FRONT TURN SIGNAL/DRL IN MY 2003 SATURN ION COUPES EXPERIENCED SIGNIFICANT EARLY-LIFE FAILURES DUE TO VARIOUS BULB QUALITY ISSUES DUE TO INADEQUATE DESIGN AND MANUFACTURE.THIS PROBLEM TREND APPEARS TO HAVE DISAPPEARED AFTER THE FALL OF 2003.THE CHANGE OF LEAD WIRE MATERIAL NEAR THE START OF MY 2004 VEHICLE PRODUCTION APPEARS TO HAVE REDUCED THE FAILURE RATE FOR MY 2004 SATURN ION COUPES.ALTHOUGH OPERATING TEMPERATURES IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES' LAMP ASSEMBLIES ARE BELOW THE SOCKET MATERIAL MAXIMUM TEMPERATURE SPECIFICATION, THEY ARE ONLY SLIGHTLY BELOW THE SPECIFICATION.IN DECEMBER 2004, GM REDUCED THE VOLTAGE TO THE LAMP ASSEMBLY IN ORDER TO REDUCE THE TEMPERATURE IN THE ASSEMBLY OF THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.WARRANTY CLAIMS ON THE SUBJECT VEHICLES DO NOT INDICATE AN INCREASING TREND OVER TIME.WARRANTY CLAIM RATE OF SUBJECT VEHICLES (EXCLUDING EARLY MY 2003 CLAIMS) IS NOT SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER THAN OTHER GM VEHICLES THAT USE COMBINATION TURN SIGNAL/DRLS.A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT TREND HAS NOT BEEN IDENTIFIED AT THIS TIME.FURTHER USE OF AGENCY RESOURCES DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE WARRANTED.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 TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES.SEE ATTACHED SUMMARY REPORT.

ON NOVEMBER 16, 2004, GM NOTIFIED NHTSA THAT IT WILL CONDUCT A SAFETY RECALL OF 178,798 MODEL YEAR (MY) 2003 AND 2004 SATURN ION SEDAN VEHICLES FOR INOPERATIVE FRONT TURN SIGNAL/DRL BULBS.GM STATED THAT TEMPERATURES IN THE LAMP ASSEMBLY EXCEED THE MATERIAL SPECIFICATION FOR THE BULB SOCKETS AND BULB BASE SLEEVES, WHICH CAUSE DEFORMATION.THE DEFORMED SOCKETS CAN CAUSE LOSS OF BULB AND SOCKET CONTACT.THE DEFORMED SLEEVES CAN CAUSE STRESS CRACKS TO FORM ON THE BULB THAT CAN LEAD TO PREMATURE BULB FAILURE.THE RECALL REMEDY IS TO REPLACE THE FRONT TURN SIGNAL/DRL BULBS AND INSPECT FOR VOLTAGE-REDUCING JUMPER (WHICH REDUCES TEMPERATURE IN LAMP ASSEMBLY) AND ADD IF NOT PRESENT.SEE NHTSA RECALL NO. 04V547 FOR DETAILS.THE BULBS FOR THE TURN SIGNAL/DRL IN THE SATURN ION SEDAN AND ION COUPE ARE IDENTICAL IN DESIGN AND MADE BY THE SAME SUPPLIER.BUT THE TURN SIGNAL/DRL SOCKETS, WIRING AND HOUSING ARE DIFFERENT IN DESIGN FOR THE SEDAN AND COUPE, AND WERE MADE BY DIFFERENT SUPPLIERS.GM'S DATA SHOWS A LOWER OPERATING TEMPERATURE FOR THE COUPE'S LAMP ASSEMBLY THAT DOES NOT EXCEED THE MATERIAL SPECIFICATION FOR THE BULB SOCKET AND THE BULB BASE SLEEVE.COMPLAINT AND WARRANTY RATE IS ALSO LOWER FOR THE COUPE.HOWEVER, GM'S WARRANTY DATA SHOWS A CONTINUING TREND FOR THE COUPE.THIS PRELIMINARY EVALUATION HAS BEEN UPGRADED TO AN ENGINEERING ANALYSIS (EA04-035) FOR FURTHER INVESTIGATION OF THE MY 2003 AND 2004 SATURN ION COUPE VEHICLES.