1990 OLDSMOBILE TORONADO User Comment / Complaint

The car was driven home from work, approximately 15 miles, and was parked in the garage of our home. ten minutes later it combusted and began burning from the engine compartment. it burned to the ground and gutted our house.  view

Dt:the tires on the consumer's 2002 ford focus 2002 were showing severe signs of wear after only 17000 miles. the first set of tires were replaced at 5000 miles due to wear. after about 12000 miles the same wear pattern reappeared. these tire were rated as 60000 mile tires. the vehicle is currently on it's third set of tires. one of the tire was taken to a ford dealership for inspection. the dealer found a service bulletin #.03-13-5 on ford's computer that covered all models of ford focus 2000-2004 that experienced inner tire wear. the upper control arms of this model were engineered incorrectly creating adverse camber to the rear tires. the remedy was a restructured control arm:upper arm kit. the newly restructured control arm :upper arm kit would only be sent to those who were eligible under the bumper to bumper warranty,3 year, 36,000 miles. consumer felt the vehicle was bought with a factory defect.  view

Dt: the contact previously owned a 1995 gmc suburban and the windshield wipers would work sometimes and other times they would not. now contact owns a 1998 chevrolet tahoe . he took his son yesterday to try for his driver's license and the dmv told his son to turn the wipers on, and they would not work. so after that he took the vehicle to the local mechanic, and they worked for him. the mechanic tried wipers several times and they worked every time. the contact is worried that it was intermittent and that could be a safety hazard because if there was wet conditions and the wipers messed up then it would obviously cause an accident because he would not be able to see. the experience he has now with the wipers is the same as with his last vehicle. the contact went on a website consumer affairs.com/automotive/gm_tahoe_wipers.html and found several complaints that consumers filed on the same vehicle with the same problem. the contact has two nhtsa campaign id numbers for the same problem that he is having with his vehicle. recalls 03v159000 and 98v150001.  view

Truck was at slow speed/icy snow condition. was appx 10 mph or under. when braking the abs engaged and truck would not stop. vehicle hit pole as vehicle would not stop. front bumper/grille and reinforcement damage but air bag did not go off.  view

Very difficult to apply brakes with vehicle speed between 5 and 10 mph. pedal was extremely difficult to push. trying to apply brakes a buzzing noise is heard from the front of the vehicle. using both feet to push the brake pedal was able to stop vehicle. no abs or brake warning lights were illuminated. incidents happened on the road as vehicle slowed in traffic.  view

All 4 power window regulators have failed at different times, leaving no emergency exit-let alone the inconveniece at drive-up windows. i also feel that it is a rip-off that not only do you have to buy both regulator with motor (although you can buy the motor alone), you have to buy them at the dealer.  view

This is in regards to today's newspaper article about the government's new investigation about gm's antilock brake problems with its trucks and suvs. my 2000 chevrolet silverado started experiencing antilock braking problems on december 2003. the problem was that whenever i braked slower than 10 mph, the brakes won't stop the truck until after it slowed down to less than 3 mph. the brake pedal would pulsate strongly. then at that speed the brakes would grab very hard. it was really annyoing and dangerous. for some time i nearly hit some cars ahead of me. on february 2004 i had the front hubs, rotors and brake pads replaced at a cost of $746.60 including labor at an independent repair shop. the warranty had expired over a year ago. the mileage on the truck was 85,000, but the truck was barely 3 years old. fyi, gm made a profit of about $8,000 when i bought the truck, according to industry publications. multiply that by 1,200,000 and you have a filthy profiteering company on your hands. i want my money reimbursed. i have never experienced such a safety problem in my life before. for settlement, i don't want a coupon for buying another gm truck at a discount. i want to be reimbursed! please do not settle for less! the detroit people must be made to see the errors of their ways and to stop profiteering at our expense!  view

Saw your recent article re defective anti-lock brakes. i have had, on numerous occassions, incidents where the anti-lock brakes failed and caused my vehicle to roll much further than normal. these incidents seem to happen if i am applying brakes and either hit a pothole or bump in the roadway while braking.  view

I have a 2002 ford explorer 4.6l v8. within the last month 3 spark plugs have been blown out of the cylinder heads. each time its a different cylinder. ford motor company has denied our claim to repair the stripped out threads in the cylinders, with a 75,000 mile extended warranty.  view

Antilock brakes activate at under 10 miles an hour on drive pavement causing stoping distance to significantly increase. several times had a near accident. chevy cleaned and repaired front wheel speed sensors and then replaced the left front. total cost of repairs was $650  view