I am writing regarding the very poor brake life and performance failure on my 2002 Chevrolet pickup, 1500 series purchased new from a local dealer. At 19,500 miles the brakes were diagnosed (on 1-15-09) by the dealer as needing complete overhaul, a cost of $571. The problem was noticeable at 12,000 miles by excessive pedal travel, the same with the emergency brake. No action was taken or notice of brake wear indicated by the dealer when notified. By 17,000 miles the brakes were noisy and when informed the dealer said my rear rotors were rusty from low use and I should consider a replacement. Unable to believe my brakes were worn out ( I'm 65 years old and have never had a vehicles' brakes wear out any where near this mileage) I decided to drive it more often to remove the rust. During this time my teenage daughter, with me as a passenger, nearly hit a semi unexpectedly blocking our lane, because the brakes worked very poorly. This was in the fall of 08. In November and December 08, I wrote to the dealer requesting cost sharing for brake repair. No response.. then, in late December I wrote to GM, customer affairs, in detroit, mi. Requesting cost sharing due to premature wearout. They requested the cost estimate on 1-15-09 and then refused or denied any assistance based on "low use". I am well aware of a broad problem with early brake wear on 2001 to 2004 (admitted by service reps at the dealer) light duty GM trucks, mostly due to rusty rotors, especially on the rears. This is further evidenced by the dealer estimate which showed expensive replacement "ceramic" pads, which were not original equipment. The dealer also admitted that at one time they tried to add a "kit" to shield the rear rotors from salt spray. These are all evidence of defective parts, something that should be covered by warranty regardless of the vehicles age or frequency of use. Or covered by a recall. Your website shows thousands of complaints on this item. Please add mine.

- Perry, MI, USA

The contact owns a 2002 Chevrolet Silverado 1500. While driving less than 10 mph on normal road conditions, the vehicle was slow to respond when the brake pedal was depressed. The contact experienced extreme difficulty coming to a complete stop. In addition, the stopping distance was increased. The vehicle was taken to an authorized dealer for inspection and they stated that the front wheel speed sensor cables had excessive rust. The vehicle was repaired. The failure mileage was 62,012 and current mileage was 62,200.

- Schauburg , IL, USA

The contact owns a 2002 Chevrolet Silverado 1500. The contact stated that the antilock brakes activated while driving 5 mph or less. NHTSA campaign id number 05V379000 (service brakes, hydraulic:antilock) was referenced. The failure could cause increased stopping distances during low speed braking applications, which could result in a crash. The recall applies to 21 other states except for Kentucky. The vehicle has not been taken to the dealer yet for diagnostic testing. The failure mileage was 101,000.

- Cadiz, KY, USA

Brake failure 2002 Chevy Silverado 44,000 miles. Low speed parking $2,500 damage results in no brakes.

- Hartford City, IN, USA

The contact owns a 2002 Chevrolet Silverado 1500. When the contact depressed the brake pedal, he heard a grinding noise. He had the tires rotated and asked the mechanic if he could examine the brakes. He noticed a chunky rust build-up on the back surface of the brakes. The dealer stated that the rear brake pads were most likely wearing at an angle. The contact was informed that he would probably need new rotors and brake pads installed. The manufacturer has not been notified. The current mileage was approximately 43,000 and failure mileage was approximately 34,000.

- Garden City, MI, USA

Stopping the vehicle, the anti-lock brakes would kick in at around 3 to 5 miles per hour and the vehicle would not stop, would roll a few more feet. Almost hit a woman and child in cross walk, had to stand up on brakes. This not stopping happened 5 or 6 times, this was the came reaction as in 2005 recall, called GM. GM Chevrolet customer assistance center said, go and get this problem confirmed by a GM dealership, did Oct. 9, '08 and they said corrosion build in same area, but because right front hub was replaced with a non GM part (after market part) they have no responsibility. This hub came with the sensor attached. In 2005 my 2002 Chevrolet Silverado was issued a recall for severe corrosion area between the front hub/bearing assembly and the wheel speed sensor. They found the left side sensor was missing an O-ring, they installed under the recall. The vehicle is doing the same thing and a local dealership service department confirmed this same corrosion problem. Called Chevrolet customer assistance center Oct 10, 08. GM Chevrolet customer assistance center called me Monday Oct, 20, '08 and said that once the recall was fixed, (how did they fix corrosion) the same problem is now my problem. When I dropped off the vehicle the brakes were bad, when I picked it up at the end of the day they were 10 time worse, really unsafe to drive. They did not charge me a dime, said that they would work it out with local rep. I will get the vehicle fixed, but how does this correct the problem?

- Mechanicsburg, PA, USA

The contact owns a 2002 Chevrolet Silverado. After having the vehicle repaired according to NHTSA campaign id number 05V379000 (service brakes, hydraulic:antilock), it is currently beginning to fail. When approaching a stop, the contact must apply extreme pressure to the brake pedal in order to stop the vehicle. The vehicle has not been diagnosed by the dealer. The current mileage was 50,229 and failure mileage was 46,000.

- Davis Junction, IL, USA

The contact owns a 2002 Chevrolet Silverado. The contact stated that the brake lines and drums corroded several times. The dealer replaced them after the first failure; however, the issue recurred. The manufacturer stated that they would extend the warranty for the lubrication and oil change only. The failure mileage was 40,000 and current mileage was 45,000.

- Bensalen, PA, USA

Inboard disc brake pads both front and rear quickly lose contact with brake rotor after replacement - I have been plagued with poor performing brakes since purchase. The inboard brake pad does not self adjust to maintain contact with the rotor. Instead it seizes in its stainless steel anti-rattle guides. Sometimes it cocks to one side, sometimes it is parallel to the rotor. This causes several problems - first lost of brake performance with long stopping distances because the seized pad is ineffective-this is a safety issue, second the seized pad does not clean the rotor surface causing premature rusting and short rotor life. My rotors need replacing every year or two because of rust on the inboard surface. I have gone through the four original rotors and 12 replacement rotors in 47000 miles and six years since new.

- Stow, OH, USA

Sudden metal hydraulic brake line rupture one of two brake line runs between the master cylinder and ABS frame mounted controller ruptured. The exterior appearance of the line is extremely rusty. The line is in a bundle of four lines - two going to the ABS controller and two returning from the ABS controller to each of the two front wheels. The other three lines have extremely rusty surfaces and appear near rupture as well. The failure occurred when braking for a traffic light and was made apparent by the brake pedal suddenly dropping to the floor. No accident or injuries occurred. The failure is not yet corrected. I have only called repair shop for estimate. The estimate was $400 to $600 per line or $1600 to $2400 for replacing all four lines based on material cost plus $82 / hr labor.

- Stow, OH, USA

The contact owns a 2002 Chevrolet Silverado 1500. The contact stated that when approaching a stop sign or traffic light, the ABS engages too early and the brake pedal vibrates. The vehicle was taken to a service station and it was discovered that the calipers needed to be replaced due to rust build up. The VIN was unknown. The current mileage was 105,000 and failure mileage was 10,400.

- Tucksbury, MA, USA

The contact owns a 2002 Chevrolet Silverado 1500. While driving 7 mph, the anti-lock brakes activated without warning. The contact stated that he had release the brakes then depressed them again to stop the vehicle. There was a recall repair made for the service brakes, hydraulic: Antilock (NHTSA campaign id # 05V379000) in January of 2006. The contact felt that remedy for the recall was not sufficient. As of May 16, 2008, the dealer had not inspected or repaired the vehicle. The current and failure mileages were 100,000.

- Smithfield, PA, USA

I have a 2002 Chevy Silverado that was part of a recall for anti-lock brakes engaging at low speeds (4-10mph). I took my truck to a dealership to have the recall service performed in 2006. Now, in 2008, as I was driving through town, my anti-lock brakes kicked in and I almost wrecked into the car in front of me. It now happens on a regular basis everytime I try to brake at low speeds. I called Chevy technical support and they were of no help whatsoever. They could not offer a good explanation as to why they would not fix my problem, even though they acknowledge it is a problem and a safety hazard.

- Smithfield, PA, USA

ABS system failure...brakes fail to work at slow speeds. Previous recall work on this system performed by dealer, still not fixed.

- Ramsey, MN, USA

The contact owns a 2002 Chevrolet C1500. While driving 5 mph and approximately 3 feet away from another vehicle, the brakes were applied, but the vehicle continued to move forward. The contact stated that the brakes made a very loud noise before the vehicle stopped. The vehicle has not been inspected by a repair shop. The brakes and both sensors were replaced approximately two years ago. The engine size was unknown and the VIN was invalid. The current and failure mileages were 35,600. Updated 11/6/07

- Bedford, OH, USA

- the contact stated that on 08/25/06 he took his 2002 Chevrolet Silverado for recall campaign# 05V379000 service repair, on the ABS. After picking up his vehicle he continued to have the same failure. The contact stated that it takes longer for him to come to a complete stop than expected. The contact stated that he has informed the dealership about this problem and has gotten no resolution. The contact stated that this happens almost every day he drives the vehicle regardless of the weather or road conditions.

- Linesville, PA, USA

: the contact stated while driving 67 mph over a bridge with brake pressure applied, the brakes failed and the vehicle struck the bridge. No injuries were sustained. The police were on the scene and a report was taken. The vehicle was inspected by an independent inspector who was unable to duplicate the problem. Updated 10/4/2006 - the inspector did find four codes stored for the brakes. GM explained that this failure was not the result of the open recall 05V379000 which had not yet been performed on the vehicle. The vehicle sustained damaged to the left side of the cab and box.

- New Franklin, MO, USA

: the contact stated while driving at any speed and depressing the brake pedal, the vehicle has an extended stopping distance. During panic braking, the pedal goes to the floor and fails to stop the vehicle. It was driven to the dealer who determined this was the design of the vehicle. Updated 7/31/2006 - the vehicle ABS has been repaired twice, once under recall. The pedal becomes spongy at time and can be pressed with little effort. The brakes were turned at 2900 miles then had to be replaced at 300 miles. Now at 19000 miles the rear brake rotors need to be replaced.

- Black River, NY, USA

: the contact stated the vehicle was inspected and the mechanic determined the rear brake rotors and rear pads were rusted and grooved. The front brakes and pads were also rusted and grooved, but not as much as the rear. The rear brakes and rotors were replaced on 11-16-05. Updated 05/02/06.

- Millstadt, IL, USA

2002 Silverado brakes failed causing consumer to hit a vehicle in driveway.*****

- Cicero, NY, USA