general problems of the 2001 Chevrolet Suburban - part 1

The contact owns a 2001 Chevrolet Suburban 1500. Upon inspection of the vehicle, the emergency brake did not function and the vehicle failed inspection. There is an open and closed investigation regarding this failure. The VIN and investigation number were unknown. The failure mileage was 68,000.

I own a 2001 Chevrolet Suburban 1500 2wd 5. 3l v8 with automatic transmission. This vehicle was bought new and from day one, the emergency brake has been completely ineffective in holding the vehicle when applied. A cursory check on the internet reveals that this is a widespread and very well-known problem for owners of similar gm vehicles. Visits to two separate gm dealerships in dallas confirm that the dealers know of this as a widespread and well-known problem as well. Oddly, the NHTSA had a chance to review this vehicle safety defect at the request of the north carolina consumer council back in 2005, yet the NHTSA decided at the time that this defect did not warrant a safety recall. The summary concludes that for auto-transmission-equipped vehicles, the presence of a "park pawl" serves as sufficient holding power for these vehicles and therefore the appeal for a safety recall was denied. There is at least one major problem with this conclusion -- no state is going to allow a vehicle without a working parking brake to pass a state safety inspection. I know this first hand, at least in texas I do. It of course makes no sense for the NHTSA to have a different standard of vehicle safety than the constituent states do. Either this is an issue worthy of a national safety recall, or the lack of a working parking brake should not serve as a vehicle for failure of a state safety inspection.

The parking brakes have failed and unable to restrict movement of the vehicle. This was discovered while a safety inspection was performed. The cost to repair the parking brake system is extensive.

: the contact stated the vehicle's parking brake was not working. The contact never used the parking brake. The vehicle was inspected by the dealership, who informed the contact that the parking brake would go bad if it was never used. Updated 9/13/2006 -the vehicle failed state inspection because the parking brake did not work.

Emergency brake went out for no reason. We have never used emergency brake since owning the car in 2001.

Parking brake failure. Appears parking brake system defective which has caused brake to be inoperable and triggered a failed state inspection on 4/7/06. This will have to be fixed in the next 15 days in order to obtain inspection. Have been told the defect in the parking brake system will necessitate another repair at the 15k mark from the date of original repair, as the system eats the brake shoes due to the defect. This problem is in no way related to use of the parking brake.

Went to get my 2001 chevy Suburban inspected and it failed because the emergency brake would not hold. The inspector said this is a extremely common problem in these vehicles and if he got 100 Suburbans in to be inspected 90 would fail because of this problem.

The parking brake on our 2001 Suburban has failed for the 3rd time in 4 years. From discussions with repair shops and other Suburban owners, it is apparent that gm has a real design flaw in the parking brake mechanism for the 2000 plus Suburbans. We live in a very hilly part of the state of texas and a good parking break would normally be considered essential. I hope that the NHTSA opens an investigation and gets this bad design recalled before one of these large SUV's accidentally breaks loose when parked on a hill and kills some child.

2001 Chevrolet Suburban, parking brake (emergency brake) has never worked. I thought this was a simple adjustment and since this vehicle is normally driven only on long trips--rather than daily use I was not too concerned. Did not bother to report to dealer because too much hassle over other defects under warranty. Recently consulted my mechanic friend (former gm) and have found this is a significant manufacturing flaw--wrong parts installed at date of manufacturer. A service bulletin was issued to dealers on this problem. Because the vehicle now is four years old and has approximately 58000 miles the dealer will not address the problem without significant expenditure on my part. I believe this is a problem that should be addressed at the manufacturers expense. I have talked to other owners of similar vehicles experiencing the same problem. Time and mileage should not discharge the manufacture from this safety issue.

Parking brake on 2001 Chevrolet Suburban won't hold. When pedal is depressed to the floor, the vehicle can still roll.

I have a 2001 Chevrolet Suburban 1/2 ton with 39,000 miles on it. The emergency (parking) brake is defective. It will not hold the vehicle. I have never used my emergency brake, and was told by various repair people that it was a known defect and a recall should be ordered. This is a safety issue, as I am sure there are many unknowing owners with an unusable emergency brake. There was a service bulletin issued: # 02-05-26-002a.

Consumer was told that because of normal driving emergency brake wore out, even if the emergency brake was never being used. Consumer decided to call dealer because he felt that it was a safety factor, knowing that the emergency brake was not effective.

The parking brake was inoperable. The dealer would not fix because the brake was not under warranty. The brake shoes were replaced. The parking brake had never been used, yet the parking shoes were worn out. The lower left cowl cover was broken and was being held together by putty.

On 2/12/04, I took my 2001 chevy Suburban in to the dealer because the emergency/parking brake did not work. Being the first time I tried to use it and it did not work, I assumed it would be a warranty repair. The dealer said no, this is common and a normal wear and tear adjustment. I said I have never used it, how can it be! not being safe w/out a emergency parking brake, I had to pay! after their "adjustment" the brakes or something squealed. Upon returning to the dealer, I asked them to check their adjustment and mentioned where I had seen on the NHTSA site about parking brakes wearing all the time. They adjusted again to spec and when I got it back, brakes still did not hold the vehicle well - it would never have held on a hill! I took it back again to the chevy dealer on 7/13/04 and asked them to check it again, and they said it was to spec and it was not an emergency brake, just a parking brake. I told them it would never hold a vehicle this size and weight on a hill! on 10/25/04, the vehicle was making a grinding/scraping sound when moving, so I took it to a tire store and they determined that the parking brakes were totally worn out and needed to be replaced ($160). I think there is a engineering design defect with this system in these vehicles. First the brakes do not appear to hold the vehicle well and second the way they are designed they fail without ever using them! you don't know they don't work until it's too late! very dangerous!!! please look into this ASAP - I think brake failure is a very dangerous problem.

Bought 2001 Suburban new. Never used emergency brake, but brake has failed and worn into my rotor to a point that both rotors now need replacing. This seems to be a very common problem and have found a number of complaints throughout the internet. Also have a family member that works for gm as a mechanic and says they have a defective system. He does these jobs all the time.

Parking brake does not hold when depressed. Pedal goes completely to the floor. Removed rear rotor and pads were very thin with only 48000 miles, and the only time the brake is used is during inspection one time each year. There are numerous reports on this problem and it is puzzling that Chevrolet does not fix this problem.

Parking brake fails to hold.

Consumer took vehicle to have a state inspection done and found that the parking brake was not holding the vehicle. It was taken to the Chevrolet dealer, and they found that the parking brake shoes were worn out, and both brake rotors needed to be replaced.

Multiple locations will not inspect vehicle due to faulty emergency brake design. Dealership will not cover and manufacturer will not warranty. $600 dealership repair or $400 at local repair facility.

Parking brake on 2001 Chevrolet Suburban 1500 does not hold. This is a known problem on Chevrolet silverado pickups which have the same type parking brake. I am having to pay to have the brake repaired in order to pass state inspection. The design and functionality of the parking brake is apparently a known problem.

I took my 2001 Suburban for the annual inspection. The shop called to say it did not pass due to the parking brake not holding. There is never a need to use the parking brake in houston, therefore I have never used it. There are 4 people in my office that have had the exact problem and had to pay to repair this problem because it is considered normal wear. I called Chevrolet zone to report this, but of course they claim to know nothing about any problems with the emergency brake. The shop removed the tires and found that the brake pads were ripped to shreads and the rotor was so badly etched that it had to be replaced. Total cost to repair the problem on a vehicle with 37,000 miles was 350. 00 per side. Please investigate this problem so hopefully Chevrolet will have to announce the clear defect in the new Suburban/tahoe design. The mechanic told me he sees this problem on a regular basis.

Parking brake failure - 2001 Chevrolet Suburban during state inspection (texas) apparent cause of parking brake failure is due to misalignment of parking brake shoe. Chevrolet has redesigned their the retaining clip which holds the parking brake shoe in place. The redesigned clip does not allow the parking brake shoe to float or move inside the rotor of the rear parking brake assembly. In this case there was abnormal wear to the inside of the parking brake rotor on the driver's side as well as abnormal wear on the parking brake shoe. There was no noticeable wear on the passenger's side rear brake rotor of parking brake shoe. Chevrolet has issued a technical bulletin to its dealers which addresses the parking brake shoe coming into contact with the rotor when the parking brake is not engaged or set. The fix is the redesigned clip which replaces the old clip. In our case, we do not use the parking brake on a regular basis (if at all) and the problem was found during a normal routine state inspection (texas) - as it failed to pass the test due to the parking brake not holding.

I recently tokk my 2001 chev Suburban to the dealership for misc repairs. One of which was that the emergency/parking brake no longer held the vehicle at all. Either in forward or reverse. One day I went to use it and it didn't work at all. How long had it been this way? I rarely, if ever, use the parking brake so I assumed it was broken and would be covered under warranty since the vehicle is only 2. 5 years old and only has 18,900 mi. The diagnosis was that the parking brake needed "adjustment" and this was a normal wear condition and would cost me $65. I felt I had no choice to not have my brakes work, so I complied. It was suggested by the service advisor to use it more often and that would keep it in adjustment? I feel there is something wrong with this brake or vehicle design, especially after reading others complaints on this website. I had my previous vehicle for 11 years and 90k miles and never had an issue with a parking brake. This is not something that you can afford to go to use and find out it doesn't work! based on the number of complaints I urge you to look into this dangerous situation - not to mention costly to the consumer for no reason at all.

2001 Chevrolet Suburban - parking brake has failed. We did not realize failure until pointed out to us by mechanic; thought it normal that the brake goes to the floor.

I asked huffines Chevrolet [plano, TX] to check my 2001 Chevrolet Suburban as the parking brake was not holding. The pedal would depress all the way to the floor and the vehicle would roll. Their service department found that the emergency parking brake had caused premature wear on the brake pads and rotors. The dealer indicated that this was the result of the body style change in 2000. The new design of the emergency brake placed it in contact with the rotors which causes premature wear. This is not a repair that is covered under the 36 month/36,000 mile bumper-to-bumper warranty. Despite that, the dealer replaced the pads and rotors at no charge. I am still not clear as to why, but the dealer told me that I would have incurred the expense of the repair if the vehicle has over 30,000 miles. I'm led to believe that this is an item, that due to the number of reported occurrences, that gm is repairing under warranty up to 30,000 miles. I consider myself fortunate in that I brought my vehicle to them at 29,700 miles. As a side note, I will point out that when this vehicle was purchased new from huffines Chevrolet, the parking pedal would depress all the way to the floor. My wife and I both found that to be odd. We always use the parking brake and we never had one operate in that fashion. But the dealer said that was normal and that brake was holding the vehicle. The existence of a potential emergency brake mechanism defect is a very serious and dangerous case for all owners of the 2000-2004 Chevrolet Suburban. Many households own and operate these vehicles and such a defect puts our wives and children at risk. I recommend, with extreme prejudice, that NHTSA conduct an investigation into this issue.

I took my 2001 Suburban to have a state inspection done and found that the parking brake was not holding. I then took the vehicle to the Chevrolet dealer and they found that the parking brake shoes were worn all the way down and both rotors needed replacement because they were rusted inside and the parking bake shoes would not hold. I only have 37000 miles on the vehicle. The dealer was only willing to split the cost of the rotors and the installation of the rotors even though the parking bake wore out after only 37000 miles or even less. The dealer reported that the parking brake should last longer than 37000 miles. I am the only person who drives this vehicle and the parking brake was never left on while driving. There is a defect on the engineering of the parking brake system that it wears out this fast with only being used when the vehicle is parked.

Parking brake failed.

Complaint regarding manufacturing defect- parking brake. (nar).

The emergency brake is not hold properly while the vehicle was parked. The dealer stated that nothing could be done vehicle was out of warranty.

Emergency brake failed, and vehicle didn't pass the local inspection in texas. Dealer stated , "we were aware of the problem but we didnt know how to fix it. ".

Consumer stated that vehicle would not release the parking brake when driving. Dealer notified.

Parking brake not holding-- goes all the way to the floor.

The emergency parking brake experienced premature wear.

The vehicle failed state inspection due to the emergency brake being inoperative. Took vehicle to dealer who diagnosed a manufacturer's design flaw with the emergency brake. The design of the emergency brake placed it in contact with the rotors which caused premature wear.

I am concerned there is a Chevrolet manufacturing defect, if what the lone star Chevrolet representative told me is correct and an unused emergency brake in a 2001 Suburban can destroy itself at any time making the vehicle unsafe to drive. On 3/10/2003 I took the vehicle to lone star Chevrolet for its 50k mile routine maintenance. Nothing was wrong with the vehicle, except for a squealing from the right side when the breaks were applied. I asked them to check the brakes. On their first call, the representative said the mechanic found the front brake rotors to be glazed over, causing the noise. I told them to fix it, a standard wear repair item. Later, the representative called again to say the mechanic found the emergency brakes were broken,not holding against the drum, which caused, the car to be unsafe to the point it would not pass inspection. When I asked how that could be since I had not experienced any difficulty in stopping vehicle, he said the emergency brake was a totally separate system from the regular brakes. I pointed out several facts to him: 1)I purchased the car new and have been the only person to drive the car except when it was in their shop for repairs. 2)I have never (not once) activated the emergency brake on the vehicle and I always check to make certain its not on when its returned from repairs. 3)the car passed its annual inspection during 12/2002 with the inspection done by their facility. There was no mention about the emergency brake not working then. In light of these issues, I asked the representative to explain how a part that has never been activated got a drum that is so badly scored and worn that it no longer works and why the problem wasn't noticed during December. He then said normal road vibrations can cause the parts to slip out of alignment causing the damage at any time, and it was not damaged during December. He went so far as to say that their mechanics saw this problem all the time.