PETERBILT Complaints

Odometer Fraud. The contact purchased a 2020 Peterbilt 579. The contact stated that while attempting to register the vehicle, it was discovered that there was a mileage discrepancy. The vehicle was a dealer sale. At the time of purchase, the vehicle mileage was 217,000, and at the time of registration, it was discovered that the mileage was 349,571.

The contact filed the complaint on behalf of a fleet driver. The contact owns a 2024 Peterbilt Conventional 579, equipped with Goodyear Tires, Tire Line: Endurance LHS, Tire Size: 295/75/R22.5, DOT Number:1MC37C8BW3223. The contact stated that while the fleet driver was driving at an undisclosed speed, there was an abnormal flapping sound coming from the tires. In addition, the contact stated that the vehicle was shaking and vibrating abnormally. The vehicle was driven to the shoulder of the road. The driver inspected the vehicle and noticed that the front passenger's side tire was cracked, and the outer tire tread had detached. The TA Truck Stop Service was contacted, and the tire was replaced. The Goodyear dealer where the tires were purchased was made aware of the failure. The manufacturer was made aware of the failure. The vehicle failure mileage was approximately 276,000. The tire failure mileage was 40,004.

The contact owns a 2024 Peterbilt 579 equipped with Goodyear Tires, Tire Line: Endurance, Tire Size: 295/75/R22.5, DOT Number: 1MC37C8BW3223. The contact stated that while driving approximately 64 MPH, there was an abnormal sound coming from the vehicle, and the vehicle vibrated abnormally. The vehicle was pulled over to the side of the road and inspected. The contact became aware that the front driver’s side tire tread had detached from the tire and damaged the headlamp and a part of the front left bumper. A mobile mechanic arrived at the location and replaced the tire. The manufacturer was not notified of the failure. The failure mileage was 292,755.

The contact was the operator of a 2026 Peterbilt 579 for an employer. The contact stated that whether driving 30 MPH or 65 MPH, after another vehicle entered the lane in front of the vehicle, the Forward Collision Avoidance: AEB and Lane Keep Assist systems erroneously activated and brought the vehicle to an unsafe and abrupt stop. The contact stated that the RADAR system had experienced a False Positive alert of a possible crash, even though the vehicle was at a safe driving distance ahead. The contact stated that the failure caused other driver’s behind the vehicle to run off the road or skid to a stop to avoid crashing into the rear of the vehicle. The contact stated that the failure also occurred with another vehicle approximately 100-feet ahead coming over into the lane, and the AEB activated, causing the wheels to lock up, bringing the vehicle to an abrupt stop. The contact stated that other drivers angrily honked at him. On one occasion, the contact was followed by an irate driver for ten minutes after the failure had occurred. The contact was concerned for his safety and the safety of the public because the system could not be overridden. The contact stated that on one occasion while his brother was driving the vehicle at a moderate speed, while the contact was asleep in the sleeping netting which the contact believes was not DOT approved, the AEB system activated and sent the contact’s body forward, causing his rib cage to strike a cabinet inside the sleeper berth, causing an injury. The contact had not sought medical attention. The contact stated that the employer was notified of the failures with the vehicle, and the contact was informed to keep driving the vehicle as-is or seek other employment. The contact stated that the RADAR system also experienced False Positive alerts and inadvertent AEB activation while driving and approaching bridges or structures that cast shadows onto the roadway bringing the vehicle to an abrupt stop. The contact stated that prior to the abrupt stop, there was a picture of

The contact owns a 2022 Peterbilt Conventional 579. The contact stated while driving at an undisclosed speed, the transmission independently shifted to neutral. The vehicle was driven to the shoulder of the road. The vehicle was turned off and restarted, and the vehicle was independently reset. The vehicle was taken to the dealer; however, the contact was informed that a software update was ordered by the manufacturer. The software update was performed; however, the failure reoccurred. The contact was informed that there was no fix for the failure because the dealer was unable to determine the cause of the failure. The manufacturer was made aware of the failure and the dealer was instructed to perform the software update again. The failure mileage was approximately 540,000.

received truck yesterday , inspected the vehicle with wheels chocked and the emergency brake released 3 out of the 4 brake chamber hoses were leaking on the emergency side of the drive axel brake chambers. With the foot brake depressed driver side steer axel brake chamber service port hose leaked also.

When the wipers are turned on in the low speed, they switch to interval mode when the turn signal switch is activated. When the turn signal switch is in the off position, the wipers will remain on interval. To get the wipers back into the low setting, you have to jiggle the turn signal switch to get them to function properly. Sometimes this takes several attempts. All of these trucks in my employer’s ownership have the same issue with some being worse than others.

The contact owns a 2024 Peterbilt 389. The contact stated while driving at various speeds, the vehicle experienced an inaccurate reading of the adaptive cruise control, causing the cruise control to disengage. Additionally, the contact stated after driving for an hour, the ABS, traction control, and electronic stability control warning lights were illuminated. The contact received notification of NHTSA Campaign Number: 24V915000 (Service Brakes, Hydraulic, Electrical System), which the contact related to the failure. The vehicle was taken to the dealer for the recall repair. The dealer informed the contact that the recall repair had been performed. The contact stated upon test-driving the vehicle, the failure persisted. The dealer was informed that the recall repair had not corrected the failure. The vehicle was not yet repaired; however, the dealer charged a labor fee. The contact declined to pay the fee and the vehicle remained with the dealer. The contact stated that the manufacturer had exceeded a reasonable amount of time for the recall repair. The manufacturer was not notified of the failure. The failure mileage was approximately 180,000.

The contact owns a 2012 Peterbilt 587. The contact stated while driving 65 MPH, the vehicle stalled. The contact was unaware of a warning light being illuminated. The contact pulled over to the side of the road where the vehicle failed to restart. The vehicle was towed to West Truck Services Center, where it was diagnosed and determined that the fuel pump had failed. The vehicle was then towed to the dealer, where it was diagnosed that the fuel pump plungers had fractured and intruded the engine. Additionally, the dealer informed the contact that there were metal shavings inside the oil filter. The dealer determined that the fuel pump and engine rod bearings needed to be replaced. The vehicle was being repaired. The contact related the failure to TSB Number: 140019. The manufacturer was notified of the failure and a claim was filed; however, the claim was denied. The failure mileage was 468,742.

The Crane operator reported that the trucks dashboard was frozen, the truck would not restart. No warning light displayed at this time and the truck was stationary. The truck was towed. Peterbilt provided mobile service and the issue was thought to be resolved. Dash froze again while the truck was traveling, warning lights and sound went off this time. No Accident occurred but having the dashboard fail when in motions was a very unsafe situation and additionally if the trucks dash system was to freeze up when the crane is deployed that would also be an unsafe situation. The truck is currently at a Peterbilt Service provider, but the issue has not been resolved after 5 weeks.