LX Forums Forum banner

Premature Lifter Failure

26K views 201 replies 20 participants last post by  Tpabayflyer 
#1 ·
Just trying to gauge some interest in a possible class action law suit against Chrysler/Dodge/JEEP for premature lifter failure. This is my 4th set going into this engine and the lifter that fails is ALWAYS the same one. The funny thing is that almost everyone of my customers who have had the same failure is in the exact same location as all of mine!!! I always use 0w-40 full syn, MOPAR filters, always done on or before 5k miles and has never gone low! This has to be something in the realm of a design flaw (ie excessive separation between cam and crank which is causing cam/lifters to be starved of oil at idle, etc). Anyway, anyone else tired of this???
 
#131 ·
I had to exit this conversation for lack of any accurate information and a Total flame war I thought this web sight would be a Good place I WAS WRONG!

Moderators Please delete my account I wont be coming back going back to SpeedTalk and Yellow Bullet forums.
Unfortunately the moderators just let this place run wild with a few "know it all's" who troll the forum and belittle and marginalize anyone who has a differing opinion than themselves. This thread is a perfect example where the OP has been harassed and belittled and the moderators don't give a damn. It's too bad, there is a lot of really good information on this forum, and the majority of the people here are great, but a few bad actors really taint the place with an ugly aura.
 
#133 ·
Well I’m no dummy. Ive been on here since 09 and have seen so many cam and lifter gone bad threads, valve seat dropped topics I could puke. If you guys think there’s nothing wrong with the design of our hemis you can stay hidden behind that rock.
Maddog is right and thank you for your fight on this
Simon you’ve brought a lot of knowledge to the board but I’ll bet in real life your an engineer,or have some type of engineer back ground. Your very smart. Am I right??


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
#134 · (Edited)
Well I'm no dummy. Ive been on here since 09 and have seen so many cam and lifter gone bad threads, valve seat dropped topics I could puke. If you guys think there's nothing wrong with the design of our hemis you can stay hidden behind that rock.
Maddog is right and thank you for your fight on this
Simon you've brought a lot of knowledge to the board but I'll bet in real life your an engineer,or have some type of engineer back ground. Your very smart. Am I right??

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Argument stems from the cause. Everyone knows something is wrong. But you have to everything agree that matches the failure. If there are three data points, and your argument is only supported by one does not mean it is the final say so. That is my whole beef. There is a lot of missing information that we will never get a hold of that could help. I.E. Say wanted to explore casting defect in a specific year range of block production...You would need numbers off couple hundred failed lifter blocks to get a control group to start a statistical fact on it. Same with Lifter being blamed. You would need to be be able to trace the supplier, and use of them through out the several vehicles they were used in.

I do not feel I ever said what is causing it, just argued against what others say cause it without having the actual data across the board to properly prove it.

And if you think new engines rely so heavily on "crank splash Lubrication" then you def have been hiding behind a rock for some time. possibly since the 1940s ish.

And coming on to the thread, offering nothing at all towards a discussion / argument besides calling some "know it alls", and acting like your horse is that much higher, then your def no better than at other garden variety troll. In fact by doing so you are belittling, and marginalizing others yourself. Ain't that funny?

Regardless of my disagreement with some folks here I would rather have them here than some one who does not offer nothing towards the actual topic vs just their personal judgment of the parties involved.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GTSDart340
#136 ·
Flat Earth PROVEN By Independent Research - YouTube

Here is a video, the earth is flat.

Get the point?

Cause that video already been hashed over. Read the thread. Can not base an "fact" using an older engine with a much newer ones. And he leaves out a lot of details. Not to mention early GEN III are known to not have anywhere the same amount of failed lifters vs the 2009+ Eagle hemis and he is clearly using a Pre Eagle hemi block.

Crank splash lubrication defect argument holds as much water as MDS Lifters being the cause of it argument.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hemissary
#138 ·
Yeah I guess your right
There's nothing wrong with the design
Your right.
Is that what you wanna hear

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Keep going back to design issues. How about trying to connect some dots your self? Perhaps if you can not come up with logical ideas that is not based on youtube clickbait monetized channels then you should have never posted in this thread.

Let em question this. If it were a 100% design issue. Then why hasn't every single hemi failed in the same manner withing same miles? Of all the million or so hemis produced, why is the general failure rate statistically low (failed vs in service)

If splash lubrication is so important, then why is my 3.3 designed by dodge, have much more of it's cam covered by the casting than the hemi generally last 200+ miles even with rough ownership? Would you like photos of this? I have a bare block?
 
#139 ·
Your right it’s not a design flaw. Everyone drives there cars the same. So it can’t be. Based on the amount of known cases that we read on the forums and the true amount of failures which we actually don’t no. Your right it’s not a design flaw.
Your right. Your absolutely right. It’s not a design flaw. It’s gotta be something else, just not a design flaw.



Oh and by the way I just spoke with both of my mechanics and they agree. It’s a design flaw they said the worst thing you can do is idle a lot and low rpm driving

But your right it’s Not a design flaw


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
#140 ·
I should also add that if it’s not a design flaw it’s the way they designed it. Which may or may not make sense to you.
Being a mechanic my self in a different field I see this every day.
And my statement is
“ if they made something that would last forever( and they could)
How many would they make, and what would happen to there stock price?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
#141 ·
If it was IN the design, thereby making it a flawed design, every engine made would have the problem. They do not.

What is so hard to comprehend about the amount of failures vs. the amount of untroubled engines is so difficult? There are literally millions more untroubled engines than there are failures.

There is not enough complete data to determine the cause, period. Anything we do is conjecture at this point.


It could be something as simple as one dull/ damaged bit on one machine. Someone could have been playing grab ass instead of actually DOING their QC checks. A post machine rinsing station not pumping enough fluid to properly rinse out the shavings.

I know of a guy (not me BTW) that worked for Chevy on the cam QC line. Dude fell asleep for his whole shift. Hundreds of cams went by him and not a single one was checked for hours. Not long after, there was a sht storm of Chevy small block cam failures and some here might be old enough to remember that. Coincidence? No one ever proved it, but the timing was uncanny.

There are so many things it COULD be, but a design flaw or a flaw in the design isn't one of them.

Sent from my moto z4 using Tapatalk
 
#143 ·
So let me ask then, how many have failed ? Does anyone know? Or are you just speculating that it's a fraction of what they made. What's the cutoff number ? 20% before you consider it a flaw in design
Personally I think it's a higher number then you think.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Obviously it's a fraction of what they made.

What part of, "If it was a design flaw, they would all have the issue" don't you get?

You also (obviously) missed the 3rd paragraph of my post. We do not have enough information. The amount of failures is part of that information.

The internet is notorious for blowing things out of proportion. Here, we have a very small (miniscule) number of owners. When 5 people out of 100 have a problem, it seems much more of a problem than when say 100 out of 10,000 in the real world have it.

Sent from my moto z4 using Tapatalk
 
#146 ·
Here is a undershot of a Chrysler Designed 3.3 I keep at the foot of my bed. Gonna go ahead and say must be a miracle of all these engines rely on crank splash lubrication and this baby looks like its gets as much splash as the Sahara gets rain and yet, still has never been widely known for lifter/roller failures due to idling or low rpm use. Like to also point the engine with improvements over time, including use in a racing platform by Shelby (Can Am series) was in production for nearly 30 years.



And even then, I would say this argument is not valid, in a discussion involving a completely different engine. I would only use it to show that really old school thinking needs to stay where it belongs. With old School stuff.
 
#150 ·
So let me ask you this then? Why does that block , and I say that block because it's based on the 5.7 and 6.4's have so many problems with lifters and cams?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Why does only some of them have issues and not all of them?

Why is it that no 3 and No 5 cylinders seem to be common?

Why is it that MDS and Non MDS lifters can fail in other random places beyond the two fore mention cylinders?

Why is it that within a year range in the 2010-2013 seem to be the worst years for lifter failures compared to other years?

Why does the fail parts not show excessively heat in the metal?

If you can answer all of these and they all point to the same conclusion, then you will have an answer. Prolonged Idling, and "splash lubrication" is a flawed ideal that ignores many other factors. A design Flaw would effect everything built to said design. A Defect effects a number of parts within a range of time/miles/wear/use.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GTSDart340
#151 ·
Finally back and I CAN SEE AGAIN!!! Almost back to my previous 20/15 eyesight once the swelling in my eyes goes away!! Don't EVER take your vision for granted girls!!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lowlife44
#152 · (Edited)
First, so what was the "BS" I retracted? I may have changed wording, for the sake of argument, but I don't recall retracting ANYTHING.

Second, so what evidence would you people who doubt this is a premature failure like? An internal TOP SECRET memo from Chrysler admitting they know and have chose to ignore it in hopes it just goes away?

Third, I'm actually collecting all the failed lifters in a bucket, as someone suggested earlier, that my techs get and getting copies of RO's.

Fourth, the machine shop where my lower end is being rebuilt has performed all the tests he can. At this point the block is in fantastic condition, the oiling system (oil galleys) has equal and adequate flow (no restrictions). There were only two issues with the engine other than the spun cam bearing which caused no damage to the block (interesting). The first one was caused by my tech who had to split the cam bearing through the lifter bore to get the cam out and accidentally hit the block deck surface with the chisel. Obviously my chisel is a lot harder steal than the block, so they had to deck it and took off about .003". The second thing is, as I found out on Monday, the #4 main journal of the crank has a crack that goes almost 2/3 of the way around the journal. Not really sure how this happened and neither does the machine shop. When I asked could this cause a continued lifter failure, the answer was "NOPE"! I then asked what else could cause a numerous lifter failures on the same cyl and same lifter bore? He said he sees this same failure all the time and the only thing he could theorize was it's a design flaw in the oiling system of some type. Hmmm...interesting! The machine shop is Scroggins Machine, Inc in Houston if anyone would like to call and confirm. He's going to do some polishing work around the lifter bores and the oil passages as best as he can to promote better oil flow and return.

As far as the crankshaft I have a new forged crank coming for it and hopefully get this beast back on the road before the end of the month or so I hope!!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lowlife44
#153 · (Edited)
Also, I find it strange that OP in this thread claim they've talked to all of these techs at their local dealers, Chrysler mgt, the president of Chrysler, etc and they all claim to have no knowledge of this FAILURE!!!

With that being said, this morning I had a customer pick up his 09 that he just dropped $6382.22 on.......wait for it.......#5 INTAKE LIFTER FAILURE AND DESTROYED CAM!!! He's done all of his maintenance here since 09 and hasn't missed an oil change. Vehicle only has only 86K miles on the odometer. If anyone would like I can provide a copy of the RO with personal information withheld of course.

Also it's interesting that Chrysler is now all of a sudden, like within the last 3 months, putting a $100 core charge on these damaged cams. They are NOT rebuilding them so why would this all of a sudden happen? Are they running out of steal and needing these old cams for recycling purposes? Doubtful!!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Renfrick1
#155 ·
Funny I just spoke to one of the techs at my local dodge dealer two days ago and he says he’s seen more failures then you could shake a stick at and shakes his head on why anyone would a dodge. He says Dodge knows about this and won’t do anything about it because it would bankrupt the company on a recall. but yet doesn’t change the design. So figure that out


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
#158 ·
Funny I just spoke to one of the techs at my local dodge dealer two days ago and he says he's seen more failures then you could shake a stick at and shakes his head on why anyone would a dodge. He says Dodge knows about this and won't do anything about it because it would bankrupt the company on a recall. but yet doesn't change the design. So figure that out

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Actually it wouldn't be a recall, as recalls are a safety concern issued by the NTSB, but more like an extension of warranty like Chrysler has done on many of the Petastar 3.6L for driver's side head defect. They only fall under the extension of warranty for very specific ACTIVE failures that need to be verified by a CHRYSLER technician with very specific testing performed first! This then spreads out the repairs thus preventing the possibility of getting hit by thousands and thousands of very expensive repairs all at once.
 
#156 ·
Yup nice to SEE you again Kevin!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Renfrick1
#157 ·
Do you think Engineers, Managers and bean counters sit around devising ways and means for planned obsolescence? What kind of job that would be for Type A Engineers...to gauge / ensure failure :^(

Yes. I do believe that. Like I said if they made something that lasted forever how many would they make ??and what would happen to there stock price ??

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
#165 ·
The manufacturers are always redesigning parts without worries of lawsuits. For instance (once again) the case of the driver's side cyl head on the 3.6L Pentastar. They simply realized there was a reoccurring failure of the cyl head. Therefor the issued an extension of warranty on the cyl head and redesigned it from happening again. That begin said the extension warranty only applies to failed cyl heads for a very specific failure. Some cyl heads will experience the failure and others will not. Kinda like premature lifter failures in Gen III Hemi engine, some will experience a failure and some will not!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lowlife44
#161 · (Edited)
<cough> in the areas of debate, the same basic block design is used for the 6.2 <cough> (this is akin to continually shooting the same fish - in the same barrel :^)
 
#164 ·
True as my lower end fit right into the wooden pallet that Chrysler constructed to send the Hellcat engine to us to replace the one with the exploded supercharger.
 
#162 ·
My brother is a mechanic at a Chrysler dealership. One of the other mechanics is working on a police car which has a #3 lifter failure. (I know it is a newer car but I forget which year and engine he told me) It is interesting that it always seems to be #3 or #5 which fail most often.
 
#163 ·
Actually it's more often #5 and/or #7 intake lifter.
 
#166 ·
I know this is an older thread but I recently got a good deal on a 2010 6.1 with the Hemi tick…. #5 cyl was the culprit with BOTH lifters bad…. I believe the exhaust(3rd from the back?) was toast with the roller flat spotted and the plunger retainer had popped out? The other lifter was still barely operational as it had a ton of play in the needle bearings and the roller had a ton of clearance….. all the rest of the lifters were like new. Engine was just recently rebuilt I was told and I believe it as it’s super clean and no hardly any carbon deposits….. cyl #5 was super clean……. I’m putting in a Comp 220/230 HRT cam/springs and I’m going to measure exact pushrod length and get custom pushrods for extra insurance against failure……. And of course I have new hellcat lifters going in……. I know this info is old but it may help someone…….
Automotive lighting Hood Bumper Gas Automotive exterior
 
#167 ·
Very nice! It might also be a good idea to replace the oil pump with either the Melling HV (10342HV) or the Hellcat. Too much oil flow in these engines is NEVER a bad thing! Also, I might suggest changing the oil and filter every 500 miles two of three times. Use a real high filtrating filter like a WIX gold/Napa gold. Hopefully it’ll catch any metal bits flowing around the engine.
 
#170 · (Edited)
Agreed as they most likely are. The strange thing is I never saw any lifter failures, while at Dodge, in any hellcats but saw plenty fail on up to 2019 5.7l & 6.4l engines. So I suspect the oil pump that is in the Hellcats and not the 5,7l or 6.4l, offers better volume/pressure, thus doing a better job at protecting the same lifters!?!
 
#169 · (Edited)
The GEN III lifters have gone through two iterations. The current version (which is backwards compatible across all GENIII blocks) has larger needle bearings (13 vs. 18 - over twice the O.D.), slightly less roller and axle cross sectional area to compensate.

There is zero correlation between the latest lifter design and the Hellcat engine. But (sometimes) ridiculous folklore drives some to bragging about the (mis)notion that there is somehow a "Hellcat" part in their build.
 
#173 ·
Hey, I fixed my lifters once. You said you did yours what, three times now? And now your engine is broken? Again. Perhaps with all of your claimed experience and contacts we would think you would not have so many issues. Yetbhere we are! Maybe you ought put yourself in that bashing thread?

My car is doing great. with stock oil pump.

And, photos I share, and claim to take are actually from me and not some bull**** story about being blind (yet somehow able to drive and work) or techs phone photos of a photo, once twice removed.

Oh and bucket of lifters.

I see you as a joke who can't even keep stories straight over time.
 
#174 ·
Hey, I fixed my lifters once. You said you did yours what, three times now? And now your engine is broken? Again. Perhaps with all of your claimed experience and contacts we would think you would not have so many issues. Yetbhere we are! Maybe you ought put yourself in that bashing thread?
☠ ☠ ☠

Richard
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top