1989 BMW 535 User Comment / Complaint

I own a 1999 dodge durango which had to have the upper and lower ball joints as well as the control arms replaced at a cost of $1200. as an owner of a durango, i do not feel the recall should be limited to model years 2000 to 2003. it is evident that the faulty parts used by dodge were used in model years prior to 2000.  view

Not necessarily an incident, yet... but how come 1999 dodge dakotas are not affected by the new recall on the ball joints?!!?!? the '99 is the exact same design as the 2000 dakota. i have a rwd 99 dakota, and i had the ball joints replaced 3 times since i've owned it. three times. daimler chrysler doesn't care if our wheels fall off?!? i had warning once of three times when my ball joints were shot. what were to happen if i rolled my truck and died?! i can't believe that the recall for the ball joints only affects the 2000-2003 models, i know from plenty of other dakota owners, the 99's are every bit as bad, if not worse. same design = same problems. i'm not paying for dc to do my ball joints again, there is no reason the 1999s should be excludeed from the recall. if the balljoints on the 200s are bad, then being the same ones on the 99s will go just as bad. i'm glad to see somebody finally stepped in and did something about this, but i am very dissapointed in the fact that the recall doesn't include all the years with the same design flaw. there is no reason for it, and quite frankly, it infuriates me.....  view

Twice i've had to replace the brakes in under 2 years due to rr caliper wearing outside pad. my mechanic said sliders free, hose is good and e-brake not sticking on. he said this is due to a defective caliper that these cars are known for.  view

Driver heard a loud winding noise coming from the front. drove vehicle to dealer for inspection. vehicle was placed on the diagnostic machine. mechanic determined that the wheel bearing needed to be replaced. this vehicle was not on recall and the warranty expired.  view

Driver's side rear tire experienced a tread separation while driving 60-65 mph, with two adults and one child in a ford aerostar 1992 van. the tire remained inflated. aftermarket equipment, installed at 136,671 miles, tire size p215/70r14, dot# dbhyc2423000.  view

Driver's side rear tire experienced a tread separation while driving 60-65 mph, with two adults and one child in a ford aerostar 1992 van. the tire remained inflated. aftermarket equipment, installed at 136,671 miles, tire size p215/70r14, dot# dbhyc2423000.  view

Motor for the passenger's side window door was defective. dealer done a thorough process to isolate the problem, and will replace the motor. manufacturer did not cooperate.  view

While the vehicle was parked it caught on fire under hood. consumer called the fire and police departments. the fire was extinguished, and there were no injuries. vehicle was towed to dealer for inspection.  view

Firestone steeltex tire tread separation. while the consumer was traveling on the highway and without warning the front driver's side tread separated from the rest of the tire. the consumer requested that nhtsa re-open the investigation of the bridgestone/firestone tires.  view

Turn signal intermittantly failed to function. failure occurs at differnt times and conditions of operations. dealers and gm said they can not fix the issues unit the failure is non intermittent. failure can occur at any time.  view