2004 Saturn L 300 on 2040-cars
1001 N. Riley Hwy, Shelbyville, Indiana, United States
Engine:2.2L I4 16V MPFI DOHC
Transmission:4-Speed Automatic
VIN (Vehicle Identification Number): 1G8JC54F74Y505851
Stock Num: H4491A
Make: Saturn
Model: L 300
Year: 2004
Exterior Color: White
Options: Drive Type: FWD
Number of Doors: 4 Doors
Mileage: 199431
Price Special - Not a Misprint!!. Hey! Look right here! In a class by itself! Creampuff! This handsome 2004 Saturn L300 is not going to disappoint. There you have it, short and sweet! You just simply can't beat a Saturn product. (Come see us at Heritage Automotive Sales or visit us at www.heritageautomotivesales.com or call 877-336-3046 to schedule your test drive today.) Visit Heritage Automotive Group online at www.heritageshelbyville.com to see more pictures of this vehicle or call us at 877-336-3046 today to schedule your test drive. (Come see us at Heritage Automotive Sales or visit us at www.heritageautomotivesales.com or call 877-336-3046 to schedule your test drive today.)
Saturn L-Series for Sale
- 2001 saturn l 200(US $3,495.00)
- 2002 saturn l 300
- 2002 saturn l 200(US $4,000.00)
- 2004 saturn l 300(US $4,988.00)
- 2000 saturn ls 1(US $2,995.00)
- 2002 saturn sc 2(US $1,999.00)
Auto Services in Indiana
World Wide Automotive Service ★★★★★
World Hyundai of Matteson ★★★★★
William`s Service Center ★★★★★
Twin City Collision Repair Inc ★★★★★
Trevino`s Auto Sales ★★★★★
Tom Cherry Muffler ★★★★★
Auto blog
Saturn Vue ignition issue was discussed three times before recall, new documents reveal
Fri, 05 Sep 2014Despite the tens of millions of recalled vehicles this year, it's somewhat rare that we get a glimpse into what goes into deciding when to conduct one of these safety campaigns. New documents published by General Motors and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration are giving us an interesting opportunity to see how the sausage is made and show the number of meetings it takes to declare a recall.
In early August, GM added about another 269,000 vehicles to its 2014 recall tally in the US when it announced a slew of new safety campaigns. Among them was a fix for the 2002-2004 Saturn Vue that covered 202,155 of them in the US. The problem was that the key could be removed from the ignition even when it wasn't in the "OFF" position, and that had caused two crashes and one injury, according to the automaker.
Where we start to see behind the veil is in the defect notice freshly released by NHTSA. It shows that GM began investigating more widely for ignition switches in April, shortly after the company expanded its ignition switch recall to a variety of Saturn products, among others, according to Automotive News. The automaker found 152 reports in the 2002-2004 Vue of vehicles rolling away or the key being removed out of a total population of 215,243 units worldwide.
US database may have overstated deaths in GM ignition switch recall
Fri, Mar 14 2014The FARS analysis didn't take into account fatal accidents where the airbags weren't supposed to deploy. Earlier today, we reported that the actual death toll attributable to GM's ignition switch problem had crested the 300 mark according to new research, well up from the original reports of 12 to 13 deaths. Now, word is breaking that the US government database that informed the study that the report was based on may have significantly overstated the correlation between the study and the GM recall. The initial study was conducted by Friedman Research on behalf of the Center for Auto Safety, and used something called the US Fatality Analysis Reporting System. To recap, the study claimed that over a 10-year period, 303 people were killed in Chevrolet Cobalt and Saturn Ion coupes and sedans when their airbags failed to deploy. These undeployed airbags were then linked to GM's ignition switch recall, which as we've explained before, can turn the ignition out of the "run" position and into the "off" or "accessory" position, disabling the airbags in the process. Now, according to a report from The Detroit News, which cites research from the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety and the National Study Center for Trauma and EMS at the University of Maryland, the FARS analysis didn't take into account fatal accidents in conditions where the airbags weren't supposed to deploy (which isn't to say crashes and deaths weren't caused by loss of control from the ignition switching off in the GM vehicles). According to the report, this was a significant number of the cases. There is another potential problem, too. According to that same report, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration uses both FARS and another database on fatalities, called the National Automotive Sampling System/Crashworthiness Data System (NASS/CDS). Where FARS uses what the DetNews calls "not always reliable" police data to record vehicular deaths within 30 days of a crash, NASS/CDS relies on what's known as a probability sample. It collects data on 5,000 crashes each year – including some found in the FARS database – to calculate a probability figure. According to a 2009 IIHS study, "Among crashes common to both databases, NASS/CDS reported deployments for 45 percent of front occupant deaths for which FARS had coded nondeployments." In plain English, FARS doesn't provide a reliable count airbag deployments.
GM recalling over 243,000 crossovers over possible seat belt defect
Tue, 17 Aug 20102010 Buick Enclave - Click above for high-res image gallery
The summer of 2010's recall hit parade continues unabated today, with General Motors having just announced that it is asking 243,403 owners of its 2009-2010 Lambda crossovers to bring their three-row haulers in for inspection. The culprit? Second-row seat belts in select Buick Enclave, Chevrolet Traverse, GMC Acadia, and Saturn Outlook CUVs have "failed to perform properly in a crash."
According to GM, a second-row seat-side trim piece is to blame, as it can impede the upward rotation of the buckle after the seat is folded flat. As a result, if the buckle makes contact with the seat frame, cosmetic damage can occur, potentially requiring additional force to operate the buckle properly. So far, no great shakes, but in the process of applying that additional force, the occupant may push the buckle cover down to the strap, potentially revealing and depressing the red release button. As a result of this, the belt may not latch, or in certain cases, it may actually appear to be latched when, in fact, it isn't.