NHTSA Complaint #711963 — 1991 ISUZU TROOPER

THE TRANSMISSION HAS BEEN SHIFTING ROUGH SINCE THE VEHICLE WAS PURCHASED NEW IN 1991. THE FIRST INCIDENT WAS COVERED UNDER WARRANTY AND SOME MINOR REPAIRS/ADJUSTMENTS WERE MADE BY THE DEALER. THE SECOND INCIDENT REQUIRED MORE EXTENSIVE REPAIRS TO THE TRANSMISSION AND I WAS REQUIRED TO PAY A PORTION OF THE REPAIRS SINCE THE WARRANTY HAD EXPIRED BY SOME 2-3K MILES. UPON THE THIRD INCIDENT WITH THE DRIVE TRAIN, I REQUESTED SOMEONE FROM THE MANUFACTURER TO INVESTIGATE. THEY REQUESTED THAT I KEEP A LOG FOR ABOUT TWO WEEKS OF THE CONDITIONS OCCURRING WHILE DRIVING. AFTER THIS PERIOD, THEY FELT THE PROBLEM WAS IN THE UNIVERSAL JOINTS. THESE WERE REPLACED AND THE PROBLEM STILL EXISTS. OTHER COMPLAINTS IN THE DRIVE TRAIN INVOLVE THE INABILITY OF THE CRUISE CONTROL TO MAINTAIN SPEED ON SLIGHT INCLINES AND WOULD SUFFER A GREAT REDUCTION IN SPEED ON A MODERATE TO STEEP INCLINE. WITH REGARDS TO THE FUEL INJECTION SYSTEM, A FUEL INJECTOR PLUG EXPLODED WHILE DRIVING AT HIGHWAY SPEEDS AND ERUPTED IN A FIRE THAT SELF-EXTINGUSHED. THE DEALER WAS INFORMED THE REPLACEMENT PART WAS NO LONGER AVAILABLE EVEN THOUGH THE VEHICLE WAS ONLY 7 YEARS OLD AT THE TIME. I PROCEEDED TO AN INDEPENDENT MECHANIC WHO WAS ABLE TO USE A GM PART (I FOUND OUT THAT THE DRIVE TRAIN AND ENGINE ARE ACTUALLY MADE IN WHOLE OR IN PART BY GM EVEN THOUGH MY VEHICLE IS AN ISUZU). THERE WAS A SECOND INCIDENT IDETICAL TO THE FIRST AND THE REPAIRS WERE AGAIN MADE. I HAD THE DEALER CONDUCT AN INVESTIGATION TO DETERMINE THE CAUSE OF THIS FAILURE. THEY WER ONLY ABLE TO DETERMINE THAT THE THERMOSTAT WAS NOT OPERATING AT FULL CAPACITY, BUT COULD NOT SAY THIS WAS THE CAUSE OF THE INJECTOR FAILURES.