Grand Design Solitude Problems by year

period and have progressed despite repeated reporting to the manufacturer. The symptoms observed are not isolated cosmetic defects. They involve multiple structural systems throughout the RV and collectively suggest the possibility of excessive frame flex, frame deformation, chassis movement under load, or failure of structural support components. These conditions may present a safety risk both to occupants and to the motoring public. One of the earliest defects involved the slide-out systems. An independent RV technician documented that the bedroom slide floor had sunk sufficiently to reduce operational clearance. The technician additionally documented that approximately the last twelve inches of the floor beneath the kitchen and dining room slide-outs had sagged by roughly one-half inch. As a result, the slides were no longer moving smoothly and were instead dragging across and damaging the finished floor surfaces. As the RV structure appears to have progressively changed geometry, cargo compartment doors have exhibited alignment-related issues. Cargo doors opening while the vehicle is being transported create a direct roadway safety hazard. If a cargo compartment door opens at highway speeds, the door may: Strike nearby vehicles. Detach from the RV. Create roadway debris hazards. When cargo doors begin opening unexpectedly during transport in conjunction with slide-floor sagging, floor deformation the possibility of a significant concern.

revealed extensive structural failures, including broken welds in the aluminum wall framing, broken welds at bulkhead areas, missing and broken lag bolts, inadequate frame support, frame flex, wall movement, and structural components separating from the unit. Repair records also documented water intrusion associated with wall movement and structural deformation. The condition appears progressive in nature. Multiple repair attempts over several years focused on slide mechanisms and related components, but later inspections identified underlying structural failures and frame flex that may have contributed to the continuing problems. I am concerned that excessive frame flex and structural failure could result in slide-out deployment while traveling, loss of structural integrity, component separation, or other safety-related failures affecting both occupants and the motoring public. Insurance denied due to what they called manufacturing deficiency. I request that NHTSA investigate whether similar Grand Design Solitude units or units built on similar frame designs are experiencing excessive frame flex, structural weld failures, inadequate frame support, or related safety defects.

separation. Repeated slide-out malfunctions, including crooked operation, binding, and floor damage. Cargo-door and latch-related concerns requiring multiple repairs. Water intrusion, roof failures, and structural deterioration concerns. These reported conditions appear similar to issues currently under investigation by NHTSA under PE24-029, which was opened after complaints alleging excessive frame flex in certain Grand Design fifth-wheel trailers. NHTSA's investigation summary references complaints involving cargo doors opening while traveling, entry doors opening while traveling, and slide-outs extending during transit. The owners report repeated service visits and ongoing failures, yet many of the original concerns allegedly remain unresolved. Of particular concern is the possibility that structural movement, frame flex, body distortion, or a chassis-related condition may be contributing to the recurring slide-out, door, alignment, and leveling-system issues. Given the reported incidents involving slide-outs opening while the RV was being towed, along with symptoms consistent with those being reviewed in PE24-029, I respectfully request that NHTSA review this vehicle for potential structural, frame, chassis, door-retention, and slide-out safety defects and determine whether these issues may represent a broader safety concern affecting other similarly equipped fifth-wheel trailers.

inspected the roof and observed no visible tears, holes, or obvious membrane damage. After traveling to a new location, I discovered the damage on September 23, 2026. A substantial section of the roof membrane had separated and peeled back, exposing the OSB decking beneath it. The extent of the separation was significantly greater than a localized puncture or small tear. The fact that the roof appeared intact before travel and was subsequently found with extensive membrane separation raises concerns about an underlying weakness in the roof assembly, including the possibility of improper membrane attachment or failure of the roof-edge fasteners. The subsequent inspection performed by a licensed RV technician identified the following specific concerns: At the joints between sections of OSB roof decking, the manufacturer used drywall tape rather than the appropriate seam-sealing tape or sealing system intended for the roof assembly. The inspection also identified steel screws around the roof perimeter and roof rails that had corroded, broken, or loosened. These fasteners were not stainless steel or an appropriately corrosion-resistant alternative. Corrosion and loss of fastener integrity appear to have compromised the roof-edge attachment. Similar steel fasteners were reportedly used at the front-cap seam. These fasteners also exhibited corrosion and had broken or loosened. The condition of these fasteners raises additional concerns regarding the integrity.

RV dealer (after I had moved the rig about 125 miles) that I shouldn't move the rig without it being repaired. I did have my insurance inspect it, but they wouldn't cover it as it was not collision caused. We were stranded at the campground where we were and were fortunate to be able to extend 30 days. I finally found a mobile welding shop to come out to repair the damaged frame. I was told that this was definitely a roll risk due to the possibility of the bent hanger giving out. This caused my wife and I much mental anguish.

frame was severely cracked and that the weld points were damaged. The contact was informed that the RV frame needed to be replaced and that reinforced welding was needed. The RV was not repaired. The manufacturer was made aware of the failure via email and telephone.