2005 Saturn Vue Base Sport Utility 4-door 2.2l on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Saturn Vue ignition issue was discussed three times before recall, new documents reveal

Despite 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.

Cars with the most reckless drivers are full of surprises

Insurify is a site for comparing auto insurance quotes. Because insurance shoppers need to submit information like the vehicles they're driving and the infractions they've compiled while driving those vehicles, Insurify has quite the database of correlations tying certain models to a habit of breaking certain laws. When the site's data analysts decided to compile a list of the top ten models for reckless driving citations in the decade from 2010 to 2019, the ranking contained a few wild entries. The Dodge Challenger making the countdown will surprise precisely zero people. But the Saturn L200? First, a definition: USLegal.com defines reckless driving as "driving with a willful or wanton disregard for safety. It is the operation of an automobile under such circumstances and in such a manner as to show a willful or reckless disregard of consequences." So this list is a caution about particular drivers more than the cars. For a baseline, according to Insurify data, for any random model, 15 out of 10,000 people who drive that model have picked up one citation for reckless driving. Back to that Challenger, then. No shocker for being here, but it's actually number 10, with 44 out of 10,000 Challenger drivers nabbed for a willful disregard of consequences on the road. That's better than the first surprise entry, the Saturn L200, a sedan only on sale for six years, with the least horsepower on the list, and out of production since 2005. The data set put drivers of GM's extraterrestrial sedan at 45 reckless pilots per 10,000 drivers. There are two pickups on the list, the only modern one being the Ram 1500 at eighth, with a rate of 46 in 10,000. Somehow, drivers of the third-best-selling pickup in the U.S. outrun the overwhelming numerical superiority of the best-selling vehicle in the States, the Ford F-150. The other pickup is the Chevrolet K1500 at number five, with a rate of 56 in 10,000. This is not only the oldest vehicle on the list, it went out of production in 2002, before any other vehicle on the list. Between the trucks, the Volkswagen CC slotted in at seven with 47 in 10,000 reckless driving chits, the Cadillac ATS slipped into sixth with 48 in 10,000.  The top four is a bag of unexpected. The Nissan 370Z is the first hardcore sports car on the list at number four, with 61 in 10,000 Z drivers flaunting their Fairladys in the face of Johnny Law.

Woman Cleared In Fatal Car Wreck After GM Letter

A Texas judge cleared a woman Monday for a car accident that killed her fiance in 2004, after General Motors acknowledged that her car would have been among millions being recalled for a problem that may have contributed to the death. Candice Anderson was driving a 2004 Saturn Ion when it suddenly veered off a road about 60 miles east of Dallas and slammed into a tree. Anderson, then 21, was severely injured when the car's air bags failed to deploy. Her 25-year-old fiance, Gene Erikson, who was a passenger, was killed. She later pleaded guilty to charges stemming from the wreck. But during a hearing Monday, State District Judge Teresa Drum expunged the conviction from her record, according to officials in the Van Zandt County court andAnderson's attorney, Bob Hilliard. In a letter given to the court ahead of the hearing, an attorney for the automaker confirmed that Anderson's Saturn would have been among 2.6 million GM vehicles recalled in February to address ignition switches that can slip out of the "run" position, causing the engines to stall and disabling power steering, brakes and air bags. Anderson's crash "is one in which the recall condition may have caused or contributed to the frontal air bag non-deployment in the accident," attorney Richard C. Godfrey wrote. Hilliard provided a copy of the letter to The Associated Press, and Godfrey confirmed its contents Monday. Anderson was initially charged with criminally negligent homicide because there was no clear explanation at the time why the wreck occurred, according to court documents from the case. She pleaded guilty to a letter charge in 2006, and was sentenced to five years' probation. She also was ordered to perform 260 hours of community service, pay court costs and cover the costs of Erikson's funeral. "GM knew this defect caused this death, yet instead of telling the truth watched silently as Candice was found guilty of involuntary manslaughter," Hilliard said Monday. "It took 10 years for GM to find its voice." In a separate statement issued by the company, GM said it "cooperated fully by providing technical information that was requested to make a decision in this matter." The carmaker also said the issue in Anderson's case was for local law enforcement and courts to consider. "That's why we took a neutral position on Ms. Anderson's case," the company's statement said. "It was appropriate for the court to determine the legal status of Ms.