FaultScore

FaultScore report

2003 Chevrolet SSR problems

Owners have filed 11 complaints about the 2003 Chevrolet SSR with NHTSA between 2004 and 2014. The largest single group is the body & structure. Across this model's run it ranks 3 of 3 worst.

C

FaultScore 44/100

Higher is worse. Measured against the other years of the Chevrolet SSR.

How this is worked out

The numbers

11

Complaints

0

Crashes reported

0

Fires reported

1

Injuries reported

2,685 mi

Median mileage at failure

Half of reported failures happened before this

90%

Failed under 36,000 miles

Inside a typical bumper-to-bumper warranty

What kind of bad

The letter says how bad. This says what kind — whether this year drew an unusual number of complaints, unusually dangerous ones, or failures that arrived unusually early.

Complaint volume 19 vs 50 Severity 47 vs 50 Early failure 100 vs 50
The dashed ring is 50 — the national norm. Further out is worse.
Complaint volume — 19
Against the median year of the Chevrolet SSR. 50 means typical for this model; 100 means roughly double.
Severity — 47
9.1% of these complaints involved a crash, fire, injury or death, against a national rate of 9.7%.
Early failure — 100
90% of failures with a mileage on record happened under 36,000 miles, against a national rate of 29%.

How 2003 compares with every other Chevrolet SSR

Click any bar to open that year's report.

Complaints filed with NHTSA, by model year. Bar colour is the FaultScore grade: A B C D F ungraded

What breaks on a 2003 Chevrolet SSR

Every complaint is filed against a part. Follow any row for the complaints about that part alone.

Body & Structure 7 63.6%

Median failure at 2,050 miles

Electrical System 3 27.3%

Median failure at 4,000 miles

Doors, Latches & Locks 1 9.1%

When it fails

Odometer readings owners gave when they filed. About half of all complaints include one.

Under 1,000 miles 1 10.0%
1,000 – 9,999 miles 8 80.0%
25,000 – 49,999 miles 1 10.0%

NHTSA crash tests

The agency crash-tested this model year itself. These are its own photographs and star ratings.

These stars come from the pre-2011 crash test programme. NHTSA rebuilt the programme for the 2011 model year and states that ratings either side of that change are not comparable — so do not read these against a 2011-or-newer car's stars.

Configuration Overall Front Side Rollover
2003 Chevrolet SSR 2-DR. Pickup

When owners complained

A spike years after the car went on sale usually means a part wearing out on schedule across the whole fleet — the kind of pattern no single owner can see from inside their own car.

Feb 2004 peak 7 Dec 2014

NHTSA investigations into the 2003 Chevrolet SSR

An investigation is the step before a recall: the agency has seen enough complaints to look into a pattern itself. An open one means it thinks something may be wrong and nothing has been fixed yet.

RQ17002 Opened 24 Apr 2017 Closed 29 Mar 2021 EXTERIOR LIGHTING:HEADLIGHTS

Loss of Headlights

The subject vehicles are model year (MY) 2002-2009 Chevrolet Trailblazer, GMC Envoy, 2004-2007 Buick Rainier, 2003-2008 Isuzu Ascender, 2005-2009 Saab 9-7X, 2002-2004 Oldsmobile Bravada, 2003-2006 Chevrolet SSR, 2005-2009 Buick Lacrosse, and 2006-2008 Pontiac Grand Prix. This scope includes the Trailblazer/Envoy variants: 2002-2006 Envoy XL/Trailblazer EXT and 2004-2005 Envoy XUV. The original scope of this investigation was expanded to include all vehicles equipped with the subject Headlight Driver Module (HDM). The focus of the investigation was to determine whether actions performed by Gene...

Recalls on the 2003 Chevrolet SSR

A complaint is one owner's allegation. A recall is the point at which the manufacturer or a regulator agreed the defect is real and dangerous enough to fix for free — however old the car is.

Canada — Transport Canada

Canada runs its own recall programme, and its campaigns do not always mirror the American ones.

Recall 2004088 52,776 units in Canada

Brakes

On certain vehicles, the brake hoses are not labelled with a designation that identifies the manufacturer of the assembly as required by CMVSS 106. This non-compliance has no effect on the performance of the involved brake hose assemblies. Correction: Since this does not pose a safety risk, no corrective action is required.

Recalls cover specific build ranges, so check your own vehicle by VIN at nhtsa.gov/recalls or, in Canada, Transport Canada.

Complaints that involved harm

Reports where the owner recorded a crash, a fire, an injury or a death.

at 2,845 miles Flagstaff, AZ 1 injured

STRUCTURE:BODY:HOOD:HINGE AND ATTACHMENTS

HOOD PROP ON MY 2003 CHEVROLET SSR IS POORLY DESIGNED IN AN ALREADY BENT CONFIGURATION TO HOLD UP AN EXCEEDINGLY HEAVY HOOD. THE 2005 MODEL YEAR WILL HAVE GAS-FILLED STRUTS TO HOLD UP THE HOOD. THEIR NEEDS TO BE A RETROFIT KIT TO PUT THE GAS STRUTS ON THE 2003 AND 2004 MODELS. ACCORDING TO THE CONTRIBUTORS TO WWW.SSRFANATIC.COM AS WELL AS MYSELF, THERE HAVE BEEN INJURIES AND MANY NEAR MISSES WITH THE HOOD FALLING AND BENDING THE PROP LIKE A PRETZEL.

NHTSA complaint #10086989 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.

The most recent complaints

In the owners' own words, exactly as filed with NHTSA.

at 37,000 miles Hilton Head Island, SC

ELECTRICAL SYSTEM

POSSIBLY THE IGNITION SWITCH. BRAND NEW BATTERIES CANNOT HOLD A CHARGE. MECHANIC CANNOT FIND THE PROBLEM.

NHTSA complaint #10664229 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.

at 4,000 miles Salem, VA

ELECTRICAL SYSTEM:IGNITION:SWITCH

WAS TRAVELING ON HIGHWAY AT 60MPH, ENGINE CUT OUT AND LOST ALL POWER. HAD TO COAST TO SHOULDER IN TRAFFIC CREATING DANGEROUS SITUATION. DIAGNOSED AS FAULTY IGNITION SWITCH.

NHTSA complaint #10569253 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.

at 4,000 miles Salem, VA

ELECTRICAL SYSTEM

WAS TRAVELING ON HIGHWAY AT 60MPH, ENGINE CUT OUT AND LOST ALL POWER. HAD TO COAST TO SHOULDER IN TRAFFIC CREATING DANGEROUS SITUATION. DIAGNOSED AS FAULTY IGNITION SWITCH.

NHTSA complaint #10569253 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.

at 2,845 miles Flagstaff, AZ 1 injured

STRUCTURE:BODY:HOOD:HINGE AND ATTACHMENTS

HOOD PROP ON MY 2003 CHEVROLET SSR IS POORLY DESIGNED IN AN ALREADY BENT CONFIGURATION TO HOLD UP AN EXCEEDINGLY HEAVY HOOD. THE 2005 MODEL YEAR WILL HAVE GAS-FILLED STRUTS TO HOLD UP THE HOOD. THEIR NEEDS TO BE A RETROFIT KIT TO PUT THE GAS STRUTS ON THE 2003 AND 2004 MODELS. ACCORDING TO THE CONTRIBUTORS TO WWW.SSRFANATIC.COM AS WELL AS MYSELF, THERE HAVE BEEN INJURIES AND MANY NEAR MISSES WITH THE HOOD FALLING AND BENDING THE PROP LIKE A PRETZEL.

NHTSA complaint #10086989 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.

at 45 miles Cameron Park, CA

STRUCTURE:BODY:HOOD:HINGE AND ATTACHMENTS

2003 CHEVY SSR ENGINE HOOD IS EXTREMELY HEAVY (TWO OR THREE TIMES THE WEIGHT OF A NORMAL HOOD) AND CHEVROLET HAS OUTFITTED THE 2003 AND 2004 CHEVY SSR WITH A SIMPLE METAL HOOD PROP ROD TO SUPPORT THE HOOD WHEN OPEN. 1) THE HOOD IS SO HEAVY MANY OWNERS WILL NOT BE ABLE TO OR WILL STRUGGLE WITH THE OPENING OF THE HOOD. THIS CAN LEAD TO SITUATIONS WHERE THE HOOD MAY BE DROPPED ON THE PERSON TRYING TO OPEN THE HOOD WITH THE POSSIBILITY FOR SEVERE INJURY. MY WIFE CANNOT OPEN THE HOOD BY HERSELF DUE TO THE EXTREME WEIGHT OF THE HOOD. 2) THE 2003/2004 HOOD PROP IS VERY MINIMAL AND BENDS UNDER THE WEIGHT OF THE HOOD. CHEVROLET HAS DONE AWAY WITH THE HOOD PROP FOR THE 2005 CHEVY SSR AND HAS INSTALLED GAS STRUTS TO LIFT AND SUPPORT THE HOOD. THE HOOD ITSELF HAS NOT CHANGED FOR 2005, SO CHEVROLET HAS FOUND THERE IS A PROBLEM WITH THE EXISTING HOOD PROP SYSTEM. EXISTING 2003 AND 2004 CHEVY SSR TRUCKS ON THE ROAD NEED TO BE UPDATED WITH THE SAME GAS STRUTS AS THE 2005 CHEVY SSR TO AVOID POSSIBLE INJURY AND/OR DEATH FROM THE HOOD FALLING DOWN ON THE PERSON WHILE TRYING TO LIFT THE HOOD OR WHILE IT IS IN ITS FULLY OPEN POSITION.

NHTSA complaint #10086628 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.

Houston, TX

LATCHES/LOCKS/LINKAGES:HOOD:LATCH

THE FRONT HOOD PROP ON THE 2003 CHEVROLET SSR IS VERY INADEQUATE FOR ITS PURPOSE AND REPRESENTS A POTENTIAL DANGER - ESPECIALLY SINCE THE HOOD IS SO HEAVY.

NHTSA complaint #10086522 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.

at 5,105 miles Sayre, PA

STRUCTURE:BODY:HOOD:HINGE AND ATTACHMENTS

I WAS CHECKING THE OIL ON MY 2003 CHEVROLET SSR. IT WAS PARKED OUTSIDE WITH THE HOOD UP AND HELD BY THE HOOD PROP ROD. A SMALL GUST OF WIND HIT THE HOOD AND SHOOK IT SLIGHTLY. I JUMPED BACK JUST TO SEE THE PROP ROD FLEXING QUITE A BIT. I HAVE ALWAYS FELT THAT THE ROD WAS NOT STRONG ENOUGH AND SINCE IT HAS A BEND IN IT SO IT CAN FIT INSIDE THE ENGINE COMPARTMENT IT JUST LOOKS WEAK. AFTER THIS I AM EXTRA CAUTIOUS WHEN WORKING UNDER THE HOOD. I FEEL THAT THE PROP ROD WAS NEVER STRONG ENOUGH. WHEN I MENTIONED THIS TO THE DEALER THEY HAD NO ANSWER. I JUST LEARNED THAT THE 2005 SSR WILL HAVE GAS STRUTS TO HOLD THE HOOD OPEN. EVIDENTLY GM MUST HAVE HAD ENOUGH COMPLAINTS TO MAKE THIS CHANGE. I WOULD LIKE THEM TO REPLACE THE PROP ROD IN ALL 2003 & 2004 SSR'S BEFORE SOME BODY DOES GET HURT. THIS HOOD IS VERY HEAVY AND COULD CAUSE SERIOUS INJURY.

NHTSA complaint #10086575 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.

at 2,525 miles Fort Lauderdale, FL

STRUCTURE:BODY:HOOD:HINGE AND ATTACHMENTS

WHILE STANDING NEXT TO THE HOOD THE HOOD DROPPED DOWN FROM THE OPEN POSITION. THIS COULD HAVE LED TO SERIOUS INJURY IF I HAD BEEN LEANING INTO THE ENGINE COMPARTMENT. THE HOOD PROP ON 2003 CHEVROLET SSR IS NOT SUFFICIENT TO HOLD THE WEIGHT OF THE HOOD. THE 2005 SSR'S HAVE A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT DESIGN. GM REFUSES TO ACKNOWLEDGE THE PROBLEM. I HAVE NOTIFIED MY DEALER AND HE SAYS THERE IS NO "FIX" FOR THE PROBLEM.

NHTSA complaint #10086595 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.

at 1,900 miles Manlius, NY

STRUCTURE:BODY:HOOD:HINGE AND ATTACHMENTS

HOOD PROP ON 2003 CHEVROLET IS NOT SUFFICIENT TO HOLD THE WEIGHT OF THE HOOD. PROP HAS BENT AND HOOD HAS FALLEN. THE 2005 HAS A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT DESIGN. GM REFUSES TO ACKNOWLEDGE THE PROBLEM.

NHTSA complaint #10086497 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.

at 2,050 miles Buchanan, TN

STRUCTURE:BODY:HOOD:HINGE AND ATTACHMENTS

HOOD PROP ROD IS TOO FLIMSY TO HOLD THE HEAVY HOOD UP(IN THE OPEN POSITION). MY PRO ROD COLLAPSED(BENT) WHILE MY HOOD WAS BEING HELD OPEN. FORTUNATELY I WAS NOT "UNDER THE HOOD" WHEN IT FELL OR I WOULD HAVE BEEN SERIOUSLY INJURED OR WORSE. THE HOOD IS MUCH TOO HEAVY TO BE SUPPORTED BY THE FLIMSY ROD. GM REPLACED MY BENT ROD WITH A NEW ROD OF THE SAME DESIGN. ALL 3,300 OF THE 2003 AND 10,000 0F THE 2004 CHEVROLET SSR'S HAVE THIS SAME PROP ROD SYSTEM. GM MEDIA ANNOUNCED LAST WEEK THAT ALL 2005 SSR'S WILL HAVE A NEW, IMPROVED, GAS-ASSISTED, SELF-SUPPORTING, HOOD-STRUTS RATHER THAN THE PROP RODS TO BETTER HOLD THE HOOD OPEN. SEVERAL OTHER SSR OWNERS HAVE HAD THE SAME PROBLEM THAT I HAVE, AND HAVE COMPLAINED TO GENERAL MOTORS BUT GM HAS DONE NOTHING TO SOLVE THE PROBLEM. IT'S ONLY A MATTER OF TIME BEFORE SOMEONE IS SERIOUSLY INJURED OR KILLED BECAUSE OF THIS SAFETY DEFECT!

NHTSA complaint #10086395 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.

at 1,030 miles Corona, CA

STRUCTURE:BODY:HOOD:HINGE AND ATTACHMENTS

HOOD PROP FOR THE 2003 CHEVROLET SSR IS FAR TOO WEAK AND POORLY DESIGNED. THE HOOD IS MUCH HEAVIER THAN THIS PROP (WITH ITS CURVED SHAPE TO FIT UNDER THE HOOD) IS ABLE TO TAKE. THIS HEAVY HOOD SHOULD HAVE PNEUMATIC STRUTS, NOT THIS FLIMSY, CURVED PIECE OF STEEL. ON THE WEB SITE WWW.SSRFANATIC.COM, MANY OF THE OWNERS DESCRIBE THE CLOSE CALLS THAT THEY HAVE HAD WITH THE PROP BENDING AND THE HOOD FALLING, NARROWLY MISSING A SERIOUS ACCIDENT. I PERSONALLY AM VERY CAREFUL, SINCE I KNOW THE DANGERS INVOLVED, BUT IT'S JUST A MATTER A TIME UNTIL SOMEONE ELSE GETS HURT, AND IT WON'T BE A MINOR INJURY. THE FIX TO ADD STRUTS IS SO EASY, SINCE IT APPEARS THAT GM HAD ORIGINALLY CONSIDERED INSTALLING STRUTS. (THE LOCATION FOR THE INSTALLATION IS CLEAR. IT IS A SIMPLE BOLT UP MODIFICATION.) AN ANONYMOUS POSTING ON WWW.SSRFANATIC.COM FROM A FACTORY ENGINEER INDICATED THAT GM WAS CONTEMPLATING ADDING STRUTS TO NEXT YEAR'S MODELS, BUT WAS HESITANT TO DO SO BECAUSE IT IMPLIES THAT THE PRESENT PROP INSTALLATION IS DEFECTIVE. THANK YOU FOR LISTENING!

NHTSA complaint #10058735 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.