Fiat Chrysler to Buy Back 500,000 Pickups

[LadyFitz...]

Originally Posted by Bamaman

My concern is with the politics of Chrysler-Fiat. Why are they getting a $105 million penalty when Government Motors ignition switches have caused so many deaths and they're not being penalized?...

Because Government Motors in largely owned by the Government?

[LadyFitz...]

Originally Posted by Skip426

...Word was they plan to install the factory trailer hitch, on those not so equipped, to supply the tank protection that's required...

Chrysler installed the frame mounted hitch on a friend's little Jeep Liberty in a recall a few years ago.

[rideandslide]

2013 dodge Ram 1500 5.7, so i beat the recall, no problem anyway, Dodge man all the way, from age 16, and never had a lemon !!!!

[TDI-Minnie]

The one thing on my Ram that seems to be a known weak spot is the pinion seal on the front of the rear diff where the driveshaft goes in. It is weeping a bit of oil. I asked at the service counter and they were very matter of fact about it, saying "they all leak eventually" but it's covered under warranty.
That's all fine and good, but a leak like that on an HD truck at 60k miles is not good.
To be fair, it's not a Ram issue but the Dana axles, which are usually very good.
Just make sure you look at yours to catch it before the oil is all gone.

[Bumps]

No mention of the Wrangler in that article, but the behind-the-rear-axle gas tank describes my Wrangler TJ. The gas tank is fully visible as it hangs just behind the rear bumper adjacent to the hitch receiver. Seems like a recall of Jeep TJs (there have to be a million of them on the road) would be fatal to FCA. And that is such a popular toad for many of us!

I'll be watching for more news on this for sure!

Thanks for the heads up!

\ken

[aauummm]

Originally Posted by Bumps

No mention of the Wrangler in that article, but the behind-the-rear-axle gas tank describes my Wrangler TJ. The gas tank is fully visible as it hangs just behind the rear bumper adjacent to the hitch receiver. Seems like a recall of Jeep TJs (there have to be a million of them on the road) would be fatal to FCA. And that is such a popular toad for many of us!

I'll be watching for more news on this for sure!

Thanks for the heads up!

\ken

My TJ has a HD skid plate/cover over the gas tank, but maybe that's because it's a Rubicon?

[wincrasher]

GM is not getting any special treatment. They are getting a $35 million dollar fine for just this one issue. The Chrysler fine covers multiple issues. GM cooperated when Chrysler did not.

What is funny is that GM was not really even obligated to do anything - these liabilities were put into "Old GM". They could have also used that as a defense in the lawsuits as well. But they've stepped up and cooperated, and have paid out millions, if not over a billion dollars.

In some ways Chrysler is getting off easy. Lots of people died because of the gas tank issue. All those trucks that they have to buy back can be resold after they "fix" them. They could have ordered they be bought up and crushed. But they didn't. They also could have ordered them to buy back all those millions of Jeeps, but they didn't. The purpose is to punish FCA, not put them out of business. They'll be alright - they have $20 billion in cash accounts.

[Muncie_6spd]

Originally Posted by wincrasher

GM is not getting any special treatment. They are getting a $35 million dollar fine for just this one issue. The Chrysler fine covers multiple issues. GM cooperated when Chrysler did not.

What is funny is that GM was not really even obligated to do anything - these liabilities were put into "Old GM". They could have also used that as a defense in the lawsuits as well. But they've stepped up and cooperated, and have paid out millions, if not over a billion dollars.

In some ways Chrysler is getting off easy. Lots of people died because of the gas tank issue. All those trucks that they have to buy back can be resold after they "fix" them. They could have ordered they be bought up and crushed. But they didn't. They also could have ordered them to buy back all those millions of Jeeps, but they didn't. The purpose is to punish FCA, not put them out of business. They'll be alright - they have $20 billion in cash accounts.

I'm sorry but I must disagree; GM did not step up and cooperate until they were caught. They knowingly killed their customers for 10 years while trying to hide the defective switch by modifying it and not changing the part number.
It is true the new GM is not obligated to pay any claims for this but after too much bad publicity they decided they would determine which customers would be paid for this defect. So far they admit to killing over 200 people but well over a thousand claims for death have been filed with the GM funded arbiter.

IMHO someone at GM should be criminally prosecuted for hiding this defect for such a long time.

[Texas SteveH]

Originally Posted by Skip426

Yes , the " death wobble " steering issue was a 4X4 problem.

The recall was not about "the death wobble", but about tie rod ends that were breaking and causing a loss of steering. That will ruin your entire day. The recall was "N49" N49 - Safety Recall - Left Outer Tie Rod Assembly / 2008-2012 Dodge RAM, and they replaced both tie rod ends, and the tie rod. However, the first batch of parts the sent out (CBUN491AA) proved to also be defective and some failed, this after many trucks were already "repaired", mine included. They recalled those parts on April 8, 2014, and mine was repaired on Feb 19, 2014, and my problem is they are saying that since my truck was already "repaired" (but with suspect parts), I'm not eligible for the new repair, or buy back.

The "death wobble" issue has not been addressed to date, and it is my belief it's inherent in the design of the 4X4 2500 and above trucks, and cannot be fixed, only treated temporarily because it will do it again as it wears.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pb-FGp5rfGU

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8J5WSkokN1M

[Skip426]

Steve ; thanks for correcting me. I retired from Chrysler in July 07, so missed out on all the BS, involved in these two problems, so had thought the recall was to do with the wobble.
Do you know if there was a change in design between the 03>07 front suspension, and the 2008's or was this just a parts supplier issue?

[JIMNLIN]

FCA Clarifies Scope of Remedies in NHTSA Consent Order


July 27, 2015 , London, UK - Certain press reports have misconstrued the scope and therefore the estimated costs of certain remedies contemplated by the consent order entered into by FCA US with NHTSA and announced today. FCA intends to clarify the scope of such remedies.

In the consent order, FCA US has agreed to additional remedies for three recall campaigns covering approximately half a million vehicles, primarily 2008 through 2012 chassis cab, 2009 through 2011 light duty and 2008 through 2012 heavy duty Ram Trucks. In each of those campaigns, FCA US will offer to owners whose vehicles have not yet been remedied, as an alternative remedy, to repurchase those vehicles at a price equal to the original purchase price less a reasonable allowance for depreciation plus ten percent. However, customers responding to the recall may continue to keep their vehicles and have them repaired in accordance with the original recall. As of this date, repairs have been completed on well over 60% of the subject vehicles, leaving less than two hundred thousand eligible vehicles. As is expressly provided for under the consent order, FCA intends that any vehicles repurchased will be remedied and resold.

In addition, FCA US is offering consumer incentives to encourage owners of vehicles subject to the structural reinforcement campaign to participate in the campaign. With respect to the 1993 through 1998 Jeep Grand Cherokee ZJs, FCA US is also offering to increase the trade-in allowance to be applied to the purchase of another FCA product, service or parts for those owners of these very old vehicles who would prefer this alternative over the installation of a trailer hitch.

All premiums paid to repurchase vehicles in the three recall campaigns and customer incentives will be applied as credits to the $20 million that FCA US has agreed to spend on industry outreach amounts included in the $105 million referred to in the consent order.

While such amounts may exceed the $20 million, contrary to certain reports, FCA US does not expect that the net cost of providing these additional alternatives will be material to its financial position, liquidity or results of operations.

http://www.media.chrysler.com/newsre...?id=16869&mid=

[Texas SteveH]

Originally Posted by Skip426

Steve ; thanks for correcting me. I retired from Chrysler in July 07, so missed out on all the BS, involved in these two problems, so had thought the recall was to do with the wobble.
Do you know if there was a change in design between the 03>07 front suspension, and the 2008's or was this just a parts supplier issue?

I'm sorry, I do not know the answer to your questions. I am only familiar with the problems of the vintage truck I own because that is what I have researched, and I believe the tie rod end problem to be a problem with the quality of the part, but the "death wobble" is a problem with the design of the front suspension and it's robustness.

There are more issues than just the track arm bushings, although they are obviously insufficiently designed. The steering gearbox is also a problem, partly because of the quality of the box, and partly because of the geometry of the drag link angle, the sector shaft bushing will prematurely wear causing excessive steering free play, which can also contribute to the wobble.

The 2500 Ram 4X4 trucks also are notorious for premature ball joint failure. Basically, the entire front end needs to be rebuilt every 80 to 90 thousand miles.

[Onstar20]

After hearing this I will be sure to stay clear of any Dodge trucks and let them pass on through.

[jfran304]

What I'm wondering is who decides what the depreciation is of the vehicles that they buy back? Since Chrysler/Fiat can resell the buy back vehicles after making repairs I could see them making a good profit off of the ones they buy back.

Jon