NHTSA — Suspension: Front: Control Arm: Lower Ball Joint Problems

1.5

hardly worth mentioning
Crashes / Fires:
0 / 0
Injuries / Deaths:
0 / 0
Average Mileage:
112,000 miles

About These NHTSA Complaints:

This data is from the NHTSA — the US gov't agency tasked with vehicle safety. Complaints are spread across multiple & redundant categories, & are not organized by problem.

So how do you find out what problems are occurring? For this NHTSA complaint data, the only way is to read through the comments below. Any duplicates or errors? It's not us.

2002 Pontiac Grand Prix suspension problems

suspension problem

Find something helpful? Spread the word.
Get notified about new defects, investigations, recalls & lawsuits for the 2002 Pontiac Grand Prix:

Unsubscribe any time. We don't sell/share your email.

2002 Pontiac Grand Prix Owner Comments

problem #1

Jul 202007

Grand Prix 6-cyl

  • Automatic transmission
  • 112,000 miles

A D V E R T I S E M E N T S

Dealership found passenger side front wheel bearing failure. Driver side front wheel bearing at mechanical wear limit. Both were replaced, as well as transmission main seals from age/wear/leakage and front passenger side lower ball joint. One month prior to this repair, the vehicle transmission shut down without warning and no electrical warning or lights while being driven. Because related other parts were repaired previosly and reported defective via this system on ODI id 10107847 and 10148428 and during this repair reported repair to Pontiac, the other associated parts were in specification. One lower passenger side ball joint was at the mechanical limit due to bad local roads on the passenger side edge of road/potholes and public utility access patches. Worn hubs (for the second time here, listen up) are available for inspection if needed. Both times this occurred, we noticed the failures either audibly (humming) or during state inspection, or both, and in all cases, the repair conditions were set by the dealership during the inspection phase. At no time during the inspection were apoligies offered, or better parts engineered, to prevent this from re-occurring. Just told that this was a common problem on this vehicle, good thing we caught it before we caused an accident (we?) and we cannot offer a better part to fix this problem permanently. They should be held accountable for the materials used to produce and investigate manufactured items for compliance with material(s) engineering and specification, as well as wear testing data that may have been improperly reported to present a favorable outcome of test failure anaylsis.

- Chadds Ford, PA, USA

Not what you are looking for?