General Motors might be facing more bad news related to its recall of 1.6 million cars for faulty ignition switches. It turns out that GM and Delphi Automotive never changed the part number after instituting a fix in 2007. While many of these replacement pieces might not be unsound, it is impossible to know unless they are inspected or have their manufacturing history checked, according to Automotive News.

According to GM's filings with the National Highway Travel Safety Administration, the automaker and supplier added a shorter, tenser spring to the switch in 2007 to prevent them from being twisted so easily. However, because the part number was never changed it would be difficult for dealers to know if they had older, faulty ignition switches in their inventory.

GM and Delphi both told Automotive News that the switches were only supplied to the automaker. They don't believe that any of them were sold to parts dealers at this time. There have also been no reported cases of drivers having defective switches installed in their vehicles, and the part subsequently failing. Although, NHTSA has received one complaint on its website from a driver worrying that a 2009 repair could have used the defective part.

According to GM spokesperson Jim Cain, the investigation into the replacement parts came at the request of NHTSA. The company knows about the issue is "cooperating fully with NHTSA," Cain said.

GM will begin repairing recalled vehicles around April 7 with new parts supplied by Delphi, but doesn't expect to have the process completed until October. Congressional hearings into the recall will be held on April 1-2, and the automaker owes its questionnaire to NHTSA on April 3.


I'm reporting this comment as:

Reported comments and users are reviewed by Autoblog staff 24 hours a day, seven days a week to determine whether they violate Community Guideline. Accounts are penalized for Community Guidelines violations and serious or repeated violations can lead to account termination.


    • 1 Second Ago
  • 31 Comments
      wanna
      • 1 Year Ago
      This is just stupid.
      jcnspots
      • 1 Year Ago
      My '08 was fixed under recall last summer; apparently it was fixed with the same crappy part and is now being recalled again. I need to figure out a way to trade it. Ugh.
      Karfreek
      • 1 Year Ago
      Wow, that is supply chain 101. Maybe even 099. Shame on GM for that not being a part of the process.
      WHO
      • 1 Year Ago
      At his point, reading GM recall notices is as comical as Hillary Clinton and Harry Reid stumbling to get out of a lie.
        Arizonarelax
        • 1 Year Ago
        @WHO
        Now, now you know people don't like political statements on AB. But I wouldn't worry too much as people are illiterate when it comes to the internet
          MichaelS
          • 1 Year Ago
          @Arizonarelax
          Case in point.... this article calls NHTSA the "National Highway Travel Safety Administration" when, in fact, it is the "National Highway TRAFFIC Safety Administration". Just sayin'.
        Arizonarelax
        • 1 Year Ago
        @WHO
        Now, now you know people don't like political statements on AB. But I wouldn't worry too much as people are illiterate when it comes to the internet
      Alfonso T. Alvarez
      • 1 Year Ago
      As many have noted, it is very, very common to not change the part number when a running change is made. This is due to the fact that there are many models using common parts at all OEM's and a part number change is difficult for everyone from the dealer to the parts suppliers. Again - pretty much standard operating procedure for EVERY OEM!
        Scott
        • 1 Year Ago
        @Alfonso T. Alvarez
        Just because it's common doesn't make it right. What about having a revision number in the part? 53000-1, 53000-2 etc. Doesn't seem to difficult to me.
          PiCASSO
          • 1 Year Ago
          @Scott
          Agreed... REVISION should be traceable on every part.
        Karfreek
        • 1 Year Ago
        @Alfonso T. Alvarez
        If the spring was changed due to safety reasons/design defect the part number should have been changed. That is best practice in the industry.
          Karfreek
          • 1 Year Ago
          @Karfreek
          In the manufacturing industries Ive worked in part revisions get a new, traceable part number. Even if it is the same form fit and function. I have had two different GM part numbers in my had that look exactly the same and work exactly the same, so this is not new for GM. Maybe they were trying to cover something up?
      Zentropy
      • 1 Year Ago
      So tired of reading about GM recalls/issues every day. Why again do people purchase GM products?
      Radioactive Flea
      • 1 Year Ago
      1.6 million people actually bought a Cobalt? Americans are so dumb.
        mikemaj82
        • 1 Year Ago
        @Radioactive Flea
        Why? It was the successor to the Cavalier which was a great little compact car. We had a 2000 and a 2003 and they lasted forever with zero problems. When my nephew turned 17 last year we gave him the 2003 and it's still going.
      beanrew
      • 1 Year Ago
      This care looks like a cartoon character from Cars. and another note, another reader commented a few days ago and listed the utter crap cars GM has made in the last 20 years. How did they do that and stay afloat you may ask? I ask why the car buying public actually shelled out for those mistakes of 100 different car variants on one platform with slightly different badges.
        normc32
        • 1 Year Ago
        @beanrew
        Toyota is working on that lowest spot right now. They have one quarter of worst cars you can buy according to CR. http://autos.yahoo.com/news/disappointing-dozen--12-cars-that-fail-to-measure-up-023648565.html
        beanrew
        • 1 Year Ago
        @beanrew
        This car....(cobalt above)...... no edit button.....
      comintheusa
      • 1 Year Ago
      Let's hope the media feeding frenzy this matter has generated applies equally to future automotive debacles, especially those involving Asian quality woes.
        MZR2.3
        • 1 Year Ago
        @comintheusa
        you meant European
          Brandon
          • 1 Year Ago
          @MZR2.3
          He clearly didn't stutter, look at the number of recalls from Asian makes compared to European makes and you have your answer.
        Ajr Ajr
        • 1 Year Ago
        @comintheusa
        you mean this? http://www.autoblog.com/2011/02/15/report-toyota-image-gets-big-boost-after-nasa-findings-revealed/ and suddenly all of the Asian manufacturer's have quality woes?
      redgpgtp97
      • 1 Year Ago
      Like the former car zar said, GM was the worst ran company he ever encountered.
      • 1 Year Ago
      [blocked]
      WHO
      • 1 Year Ago
      At his point, reading GM recall notices is as comical as Hillary Clinton and Harry Reid stumbling to get out of a lie.
    • Load More Comments