Total Complaints
21 filings
GMC SILVERADO · model year
21 NHTSA complaints, 1 crash report, and 1 active recall for this specific cohort.
NHTSA overall rating
Not crash-tested
New Car Assessment Program
The 2000GMCSILVERADO carries 21 consumer safety complaints in NHTSA's Office of Defects Investigation database for this specific model-year cohort. Within that volume, owners reported 1 crash, 0 fires, 0 injuries, and 0 fatalities. No NCAP 5-star crash-test rating is available for this model year in the federal database.
Component-level analysis is where model-year complaints become actionable: the top complaint category for the 2000 SILVERADO is service brakes, hydraulic:antilock/traction control/electronic limited slip with 8 filings, followed by engine and engine cooling:engine:gasoline (1) and service brakes, air:antilock:abs warning light (1). Concentration in one or two component groups is the classic signature of a systemic defect; a flat distribution usually reflects normal aging, warranty complaints, or isolated build-plant variability. This model year has 1 active recall campaign, which means the manufacturer is obligated to remedy the covered defect at no charge for the life of the vehicle — the full NHTSA campaign numbers are listed below.
NHTSA currently has 2 investigation files overlapping the 2000 SILVERADO. Owners comparing this cohort against neighboring years should pair the counters above with the complaint-by-year trend on the parent model page — a spike in a single year often tracks to a platform refresh, a new transmission supplier, or an updated ECU calibration. Use the related-complaint feed below to read raw owner narratives before deciding whether any pattern here affects your specific use case.
Total Complaints
21 filings
Crashes Reported
1 reports
Source
NHTSA ODI
Federal complaints database
At or below the fleet median complaint volume.
| Component | Count |
|---|---|
| SERVICE BRAKES, HYDRAULIC:ANTILOCK/TRACTION CONTROL/ELECTRONIC LIMITED SLIP | 8 |
| ENGINE AND ENGINE COOLING:ENGINE:GASOLINE | 1 |
| SERVICE BRAKES, AIR:ANTILOCK:ABS WARNING LIGHT | 1 |
| SERVICE BRAKES, HYDRAULIC:POWER ASSIST | 1 |
| STEERING:HYDRAULIC POWER ASSIST SYSTEM | 1 |
| VEHICLE SPEED CONTROL:ACCELERATOR PEDAL | 1 |
| SERVICE BRAKES, HYDRAULIC:ANTILOCK/TRACTION CONTROL/ELECTRONIC LIMITED SLIP:CONTROL UNIT/MODULE | 1 |
| SERVICE BRAKES, HYDRAULIC:FOUNDATION COMPONENTS:HOSES, LINES/PIPING, AND FITTINGS | 1 |
| PARKING BRAKE | 1 |
| SERVICE BRAKES, HYDRAULIC:FOUNDATION COMPONENTS:DISC:ROTOR | 1 |
| STEERING | 1 |
| FUEL SYSTEM, GASOLINE | 1 |
| STRUCTURE:BODY | 1 |
| FUEL/PROPULSION SYSTEM | 1 |
EXTERIOR LIGHTING
CERTAIN PRO-A MOTORS CORNER LAMPS, TURN SIGNALS, AND HEADLIGHTS SOLD AS REPLACEMENT LAMPS FOR USE ON CERTAIN PASSENGER VEHICLES LISTED ABOVE. SOME COMBINATION LAMPS THAT ARE NOT EQUIPPED WITH AMBER SIDE REFLECTORS FAIL TO CONFORM TO FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARD NO. 108, LAMPS, REFLECTIVE D
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2000 GMC SILVERADO. WHILE INSPECTING THE VEHICLE, THE CONTACT OBSERVED CORROSION AROUND THE CROSS MEMBER THAT SUPPORTED THE FUEL TANK. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT DIAGNOSED OR REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE AND VIN WERE NOT AVAILABLE.
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2000 GMC SILVERADO. WHILE INSPECTING THE VEHICLE, THE CONTACT OBSERVED CORROSION AROUND THE CROSS MEMBER THAT SUPPORTED THE FUEL TANK. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT DIAGNOSED OR REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE AND VIN WERE NOT AVAILABLE.
DT*: THE CONTACT STATED WHILE THE VEHICLE WAS BEING SERVICED, THE BRAKE LINE WAS OBSERVED WET AND REAR BRAKE ROTORS WERE FLAKING APART. THERE WAS NO WARNING SIGNALS PRIOR TO THE INCIDENT. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A SERVICE DEALER WHO DETERMINED THAT THE BRAKE LINES WERE RUSTED AND STARTING TO LEAK. ALSO, THE REAR BRAKE ROTORS WERE FLAKING APART, AND THE MAIN BRAKE LINE TO THE REAR BRAKES RUSTED THROUGH WHICH CAUSED BRAKE FLUID LEAKAGE. THE SERVICE DEALER ADVISED THAT THE VEHICLE WOULD NEED BRAKE ROTOR BACKING PLATES AND A REAR BRAKE LINE. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED AND APPROVED REPLACING ONE BRAKE LINE AT NO COST BUT WOULD NOT APPROVE REPLACING THE ROTORS AND 4 OTHER BRAKE LINES THAT WERE BADLY RUSTED. THE CONSUMER STATED HE WAS UNABLE TO USE THE EMERGENCY BRAKE, BECAUSE THE RETAING CLIP THAT HELD THE BRAKE SHOES IN PLACE HAD RUSTED. THE CONSUMER COMPLAINED OF A NOISE IN THE STEERING. THE FUEL PRESSURE REGULATOR WAS REPALCED.UPDATED 12/01/06. *JB
Mileage: 51,234
DT*: THE CONTACT STATED WHILE THE VEHICLE WAS BEING SERVICED, THE BRAKE LINE WAS OBSERVED WET AND REAR BRAKE ROTORS WERE FLAKING APART. THERE WAS NO WARNING SIGNALS PRIOR TO THE INCIDENT. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A SERVICE DEALER WHO DETERMINED THAT THE BRAKE LINES WERE RUSTED AND STARTING TO LEAK. ALSO, THE REAR BRAKE ROTORS WERE FLAKING APART, AND THE MAIN BRAKE LINE TO THE REAR BRAKES RUSTED THROUGH WHICH CAUSED BRAKE FLUID LEAKAGE. THE SERVICE DEALER ADVISED THAT THE VEHICLE WOULD NEED BRAKE ROTOR BACKING PLATES AND A REAR BRAKE LINE. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED AND APPROVED REPLACING ONE BRAKE LINE AT NO COST BUT WOULD NOT APPROVE REPLACING THE ROTORS AND 4 OTHER BRAKE LINES THAT WERE BADLY RUSTED. THE CONSUMER STATED HE WAS UNABLE TO USE THE EMERGENCY BRAKE, BECAUSE THE RETAING CLIP THAT HELD THE BRAKE SHOES IN PLACE HAD RUSTED. THE CONSUMER COMPLAINED OF A NOISE IN THE STEERING. THE FUEL PRESSURE REGULATOR WAS REPALCED.UPDATED 12/01/06. *JB
Mileage: 51,234
DT*: THE CONTACT STATED WHILE THE VEHICLE WAS BEING SERVICED, THE BRAKE LINE WAS OBSERVED WET AND REAR BRAKE ROTORS WERE FLAKING APART. THERE WAS NO WARNING SIGNALS PRIOR TO THE INCIDENT. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A SERVICE DEALER WHO DETERMINED THAT THE BRAKE LINES WERE RUSTED AND STARTING TO LEAK. ALSO, THE REAR BRAKE ROTORS WERE FLAKING APART, AND THE MAIN BRAKE LINE TO THE REAR BRAKES RUSTED THROUGH WHICH CAUSED BRAKE FLUID LEAKAGE. THE SERVICE DEALER ADVISED THAT THE VEHICLE WOULD NEED BRAKE ROTOR BACKING PLATES AND A REAR BRAKE LINE. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED AND APPROVED REPLACING ONE BRAKE LINE AT NO COST BUT WOULD NOT APPROVE REPLACING THE ROTORS AND 4 OTHER BRAKE LINES THAT WERE BADLY RUSTED. THE CONSUMER STATED HE WAS UNABLE TO USE THE EMERGENCY BRAKE, BECAUSE THE RETAING CLIP THAT HELD THE BRAKE SHOES IN PLACE HAD RUSTED. THE CONSUMER COMPLAINED OF A NOISE IN THE STEERING. THE FUEL PRESSURE REGULATOR WAS REPALCED.UPDATED 12/01/06. *JB
Mileage: 51,234
DT*: THE CONTACT STATED WHILE THE VEHICLE WAS BEING SERVICED, THE BRAKE LINE WAS OBSERVED WET AND REAR BRAKE ROTORS WERE FLAKING APART. THERE WAS NO WARNING SIGNALS PRIOR TO THE INCIDENT. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A SERVICE DEALER WHO DETERMINED THAT THE BRAKE LINES WERE RUSTED AND STARTING TO LEAK. ALSO, THE REAR BRAKE ROTORS WERE FLAKING APART, AND THE MAIN BRAKE LINE TO THE REAR BRAKES RUSTED THROUGH WHICH CAUSED BRAKE FLUID LEAKAGE. THE SERVICE DEALER ADVISED THAT THE VEHICLE WOULD NEED BRAKE ROTOR BACKING PLATES AND A REAR BRAKE LINE. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED AND APPROVED REPLACING ONE BRAKE LINE AT NO COST BUT WOULD NOT APPROVE REPLACING THE ROTORS AND 4 OTHER BRAKE LINES THAT WERE BADLY RUSTED. THE CONSUMER STATED HE WAS UNABLE TO USE THE EMERGENCY BRAKE, BECAUSE THE RETAING CLIP THAT HELD THE BRAKE SHOES IN PLACE HAD RUSTED. THE CONSUMER COMPLAINED OF A NOISE IN THE STEERING. THE FUEL PRESSURE REGULATOR WAS REPALCED.UPDATED 12/01/06. *JB
Mileage: 51,234
DT*: THE CONTACT STATED WHILE THE VEHICLE WAS BEING SERVICED, THE BRAKE LINE WAS OBSERVED WET AND REAR BRAKE ROTORS WERE FLAKING APART. THERE WAS NO WARNING SIGNALS PRIOR TO THE INCIDENT. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A SERVICE DEALER WHO DETERMINED THAT THE BRAKE LINES WERE RUSTED AND STARTING TO LEAK. ALSO, THE REAR BRAKE ROTORS WERE FLAKING APART, AND THE MAIN BRAKE LINE TO THE REAR BRAKES RUSTED THROUGH WHICH CAUSED BRAKE FLUID LEAKAGE. THE SERVICE DEALER ADVISED THAT THE VEHICLE WOULD NEED BRAKE ROTOR BACKING PLATES AND A REAR BRAKE LINE. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED AND APPROVED REPLACING ONE BRAKE LINE AT NO COST BUT WOULD NOT APPROVE REPLACING THE ROTORS AND 4 OTHER BRAKE LINES THAT WERE BADLY RUSTED. THE CONSUMER STATED HE WAS UNABLE TO USE THE EMERGENCY BRAKE, BECAUSE THE RETAING CLIP THAT HELD THE BRAKE SHOES IN PLACE HAD RUSTED. THE CONSUMER COMPLAINED OF A NOISE IN THE STEERING. THE FUEL PRESSURE REGULATOR WAS REPALCED.UPDATED 12/01/06. *JB
Mileage: 51,234
RUST ON ROTORS!! - GMC 1500 1/2 TON PICKUP. 2000 YR. TO MAKE IT SHORT FOR NOW, WAS TOLD BY A GMC TECHNICIAN AT 19000 MILES THAT RUST WAS FORMING ON BRAKE ROTORS. DEALERSHIP TOLD ME GM HAD A PROBLEM WITH THE METAL FOR THE ROTORS. I HAVE A CASE NUMBER WITH GM ABOUT THE PROBLEM. BUT LIKE I SAID I WILL MAKE IT SHORT FOR NOW. FEBRUARY, WHILE IN FLORIDA ,BRAKES WOULDN'T WORK. WENT INTO MEDIAN STRIP. NOBODY HURT, NO DAMAGE, LUCKY!! GMC DEALER IN FLORIDA HAD TO REPLACE THE ROTORS DUE TO THE RUST. THEY COULDN'T TURN THE ROTORS DOWN, THEY WERE THAT BAD. THE TRUCK HAS ONLY 37000 MILES ON IT, BUT THE PROBLEM IS THE BAD METAL. I KNOW THERE IS OTHER PEOPLE WHO HAVE HAD TO DO THE SAME THING, NEW ROTORS FOR SAFETY. BY THE WAY THERE ISN'T A SPECK OF RUST ANYWHERE ON THAT TRUCK EXCEPT THE ROTORS. THEY HAD A RECALL ON THE ANTI-LOCK BRAKES FOR RUST, DEALER SAID MINE WAS OK. LIKE I SAID NO RUST EXCEPT FOR THE ROTORS. THIS SHOULD HAVE NOT HAPPEN WE COULD HAVE BEEN INJURED OR WORSE!!!! *JB
Mileage: 37,000
DT; 2000 CHEVROLET K1500 SILVERADO. THE ANTI LOCK BRAKES ENGAGE UNDER NORMAL STOPPING. WHEN PULLING INTO A STOP THE BRAKES DO NOT STOP THE VEHICLE, AND THE ANTI LOCK BRAKES ARE TRIGGERED, AND THIS CREATES A SLOW STOP. THIS HAPPENS AT LEAST 50% OF THE TIME, AND THIS IS UNPREDICTABLE. IT IS PROGRESSIVELY GETTING WORSE. HAD NOT TAKEN THE VEHICLE TO A MECHANIC, BUT DONE RESEARCH AND KNOW THAT THIS IS A COMMON COMPLAINT AND CONCERN. HAD THE VEHICLE TO THE MECHANIC FOR OTHER THINGS ,AND THEY HAVE NOT TOLD ME ABOUT ANY RECALLS. THIS HAS BEEN HAPPENING FOR THE PAST 4 MONTHS. NO ACCIDENTS OR CRASHES. *AK
Mileage: 90,000
ABS SENSOR PROBLEMS ON 2000 GM 2500. ABS ENGAGES AT LOW SPEED AND PREVENTS STOPPING. SENSORS HAVE BEN REPLACED OR CLEANED AT LEAST THREE TIME UNDER WARRANTY. NOW AT 55,000 MILES ABS HAS AGAIN FAILED. FOR SAFTY REASONS I HAVE DISCONNECTED THE ABS SYSTEM.
WHILE BRAKING ANTI LOCK BRAKES FAILED. THIS CAUSED THE PEDAL TO GO TO THE FLOOR. DEALERSHIP WAS NOTIFIED, BUT DID NOT RESOLVE THE PROBLEM. *AK *SC
Mileage: 36,000
WHEN ATTEMPTING TO DEPRESS THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL, THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL WOULD NOT DEPRESS UNLESS THE CONSUMER PRESSED FIRMLY. THE CONSUMER HAD NOTIFIED THE DEALERSHIP ABOUT THIS ISSUE. PLEASE PROVIDE ANY FURTHER DETAILS. *NM
CONSUMER STATED THAT ABOUT 2 WEEKS AGO WHILE BACKING OUT OF THE GARAGE, THE POWER BRAKES AND POWER STEERING FAILED. CONSUMER SHUT OFF THE VEHICLE OFF AND THEN RESTARTED IT. VEHICLE WORKED PROPERLY AFTERWARDS. *AK *JB
Mileage: 62,000
CONSUMER STATED THAT ABOUT 2 WEEKS AGO WHILE BACKING OUT OF THE GARAGE, THE POWER BRAKES AND POWER STEERING FAILED. CONSUMER SHUT OFF THE VEHICLE OFF AND THEN RESTARTED IT. VEHICLE WORKED PROPERLY AFTERWARDS. *AK *JB
Mileage: 62,000
CONSUMER STATES THAT WHILE TRYING TO PARK THE ANTI-LOCK SYSTEM ACTIVATED AND THE CONSUMER COULD NOT STOP AND RAN INTO A BUILDING. *MR
PRIOR TO VEHICLE WARMING UP THERE IS A NOISE COMING FROM ENGINE. MANUFACTURER HAS BEEN AWARE OF PROBLEM. *AK
CONSUMER STATED THAT WHILE BACKING UP BRAKES WORKED FINE AND WENT FORWARD BRAKES FAILED CAUSING DAMAGE TO THE LEFT FRONT BUMPER. *YD
CONSUMER STATED THAT WHILE BACKING UP BRAKES WORKED FINE AND WENT FORWARD BRAKES FAILED CAUSING DAMAGE TO THE LEFT FRONT BUMPER. *YD
WHEN APPLYING BRAKES PEDAL WENT TO THE FLOORBOARD, , AND VEHICLE MOVED FORWARD WITHOUT PRIOR NOTICE. DEALERSHIP WAS AWARE OF PROBLEM.*AK
WHEN APPYLING BRAKES PEDAL RESISTED PRESSURE AND BECAME EXTREMELY HARD, RESULTING IN EXTENDED STOPPING DISTANCE. PLEASE GIVE ANY FURTHER DETAILS.*AK
Data as of 2025. Sources: NHTSA Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) complaints database, NHTSA recall campaign API, NHTSA NCAP crash-test ratings, and NHTSA FARS for fatality cross-reference.
Read our methodology — how this data is sourced, computed, and verified.