[Hemissary]

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???

A lawsuit would be futile; your evidence overwhelmingly points to something other than the lifters being root cause.

Why would you continue to replace lifters - when the evidence (four failures @ #5 hole - continued R&R expecting a different result) very plainly points to something else?

 

[Hemissary]

Like what? As I stated in my first comment, 90% of my customers that have had lifter failures have the intake lifter fail on the #5 cyl! So whatever it is, it's not just mine or my imagination!

Also, after working in dealership service departments over the last 20 years, I've seen some really crazy things end up with "extensions of warranty" when people scream loud enough! ESPECIALLY Chrysler!!!

What is the probability (or odds) of a second lifter, no matter the manufacturer, failing in the same location. What is the probability (or odds) of a 3rd lifter - now out of a total of 48 units - failing in the same location?

The lifters are a manifestation of a root cause...not thee root cause.

 

[Hemissary]

Too many unknowns. I have an 06 6.1 with over 260K kms and as far as I know, the engine has never been apart. I don't burn or leak any oil. I have replaced oil pump though as part of timing chain maintenance at 140K kms. Generally, not as many issues with the 6.1 but the issue seems to be more common with the 392. Prolly because less 6.1's out there. In your first post, you mention "almost all" of your clients and then you mention "90% of my customers". What is the actual # of clients you are talking about here? Are we talking 5, 20, 75, 175? What is mileage in each case? Service history of vehicle? oil/filter used? duration between oil changes? Unless you document in detail each instance and the entire service and use background for each vehicle, your submission to FCA is too general for them to consider. If you're serious, you should be able to launch a class action on your own and your lawyers will advertise to acquire info on owners who have experienced the same issue.

Agreed; the fact is there are relatively few failures versus just how many (hundreds of thousands of) engines there are out there operating normally. The problem is the Internet has the (very) bad habit of focusing and then magnifying(!) any and all failures - then crossing a baseless empathy bridge into "mass failure" mode and heading down various rabbit holes. The poster child for this is on the RAM forum where people are drinking their own and everyone else's bath water that somehow engine oil is a root cause that has generated thousands(!) of 100% subjective (zero evidence-based) posts.

Anyone who begins reading that thread - just like here - who buys into the rhetoric - begins the needless anxiety / hand-wringing process of needlessly worrying about their perfectly serviceable engine. It serves no one - except those who need to support their own (baseless / subjective) spin cycles (excellent candidate for a psychological case study of anchoring bias, confirmation / in-group biases, backfire effect).

For the OP; like BryGuy, I too am now curious as to who you are, who your clients are, what "almost all" actually means, what 90% means and the proof to back these statements up.

 

[Hemissary]

I agree completely. I've heard about the dropped valve seats in the 5.7 Hemi. I've heard rumors it's caused by overheating, you name it. My Magnum overheated the day I drove it home. I drove it about two hours, I think it topped out at about 240. I have since put almost 30k on it, no issues. I was seriously concerned at first, hearing so the horror stories, but then decided to enjoy my car. If it were to break, I'd deal with it then. I hate how everyone gets so paranoid about something with a very small chance of occuring, and then tries to blame the failure of a 100k+ mile engine on the manufacturer.

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk

You've eluded to what made me speak out in that RAM thread; good folks with perfectly running engines who came across the thread and were sucked into the emotional vortex, then electing to buy (literally) into changing their oil to some mix-and-match concoctions based on fear and a baseless / self-generating circle-jerk of innuendo - devoid of critical thinking.

To put this back on course is to remind everyone that the evidence as presented here - shows unequivocally - the lifters themselves are not issue.

 

[Hemissary]

My logic for Chrsler being held liable for faulty engineering in the first place which GUARANTEES a parts failure at some time. Think of like when Ford was sued for the spark plugs breaking in the 05-09 5.4l REGARDLESS of the mileage. Ford redesigned the plugs to prevent it from happening and refunded millions upon millions to customers who paid to have the broken plugs removed and/or engine repairs associated with the broken plugs!

The proof is from the multiple failures I've had on the intake valve on the #5 cyl along with MILLIONS of others!!! There's the proof. When the engine was received by me it was freshly built and still wrapped in plastic and all lifted bores were cleaned out by me before the lifters and heads were installed. Highly unlikely that 3 lifter failures in the same location on the engine along with the hundreds I've personally seen and the millions of others that have had the same failure has anything to do with contamination unless all engines were contaminated from the factory. In which case it goes back on Chrysler for contamination the engines upon the initial build of the engines.

Millions??

Utter bullsh!t.

Realize(!) - there are multiple Techs on here from across the continent. I'm on a first name basis with Techs / Service Managers / Parts People / Parts Managers across three Dealership in my city alone. They laughed today, when I mentioned your numbers.

Millions... That's quite the jump. That implies that every single engine Chrysler built has had a failure... Which is blatantly false.

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk

Precisely.

I ageree! Which points back to a engineering issue like the cam and crank separation are is too far which is not allowing the crank to sling enough oil onto the cam and lifters at idle. For additional proof I offer the hundreds I've personally dealt with for the EXACT SAME FAILURE in the exact same position. In those hundreds I've dealt with I would guess at least 70-80 failures in the exact same location of police and state trooper vehicles well within warranty. Also, many of them have had multiple failures on the same vehicle out of warranty which Chrysler has repaired at no charge! Therefore this has to be an engineering problem from the beginning. Otherwise how do you explain other engines that use the same type of lifters that never experience this failure with the only rear difference being the crank and cam are much closer together?

You keep missing the obvious; neither the camshaft nor the lifters - even under any sort of recognizable / rigorous / repeatable investigation - would fail to find the lifters / camshaft as root cause. Instead of grasping at Internet innuendo (for example - counterweight sling lubrication) and bone up how these particular lifters function, where lubrication comes from (hint; two sources).

As far as you personally "dealing" directly with "100's" this issue; which Dealership are you employed at?

Being that I've been writing service for 30+ years and specifically Chrysler for approx 10 of those years I would guess the number of lifter failures on 5.7 and 6.1 has to be in the hundreds. Of those hundreds I'd say 90% of them have been the #5 cyl intake lifter. Most of those if not all have been properly maintained, at least as far as oil changes go. Strangely I've never had a sludged up hemi. Numerous ones have failed under basic warranty and even more have failed under powertrain warranty. As far as getting other vehicle specific details that would be for people to join a lawsuit (class action). The lawyers would then ask said litigants for their paperwork (maintenance, failures and repairs) then determine if each litigant has a case. I've seen this happen many times with Ford, Chevy, Chrysler, etc and this is the exact way they all start. The manufactures are not just gonna come out and admit they screwed up. They have to be forced to take responsibility/action.

Agreed! Is it an alignment or something like the engine cradle was misaligned from the factory as which was the case when the LX first came out?!? If it's a alignment issue because the customer was curb surfing it's on the customer at that point. However, if it's a misaligned engine cradle from the initial build then that's on the manufacturer!

I call bullsh!t on your assertion you have personally dealt with this issue in the numbers you state - especially(!) pre-08' engines. Show us the proof - real numbers with root cause and stats - not just (your) hearsay.

Being that I've been a Chrysler service advisor for the last 10 years, I would normally agree. I'm constantly hearing about "a forum said EVERYONE of these cars has this failure or that failure" or "my neighbors nest friends cousins uncle said this or that is what's wrong with my vehicle and it should be FREE!!!" Meanwhile I'll see one or two of the specific failure the customer is speaking of. However, in this case again, I've personally dealt with hundreds of lifter failures on 5.7 and 6.1 hemis in 10 years and, as stated before, I would guess 90% of those have had the same failure (#5 cyl intake lifter).

Where's the proof to back up your number of failures (04'-08' 5.7 / 6.1 / Eagle 5.7 / Apache 6.4)?

 

[Hemissary]

No yet but hopefully by tomorrow. Block is a 6.1l based 6.4l from Arrington.

What does this mean?

Was this block modified by Arrington?

 

[Hemissary]

Sorry you feel that way. However, I'm speaking from my own, not what others have told me, experience!

I'm well aware of how the oiling system works on these engines and it's inadequate for the application.

In the past I was a service advisor for 2 years at MedVed Chrysler/JEEP in Denver, later I became the service manager at Denver JEEP for 3.5 years and for the last 4.5 years I've been a service advisor at a Dodge/Chrysler/Jeep dealer in Houston.

All stated in previous responses. Look, once again I'm not a novice at this and do it on the weekend kinda thing. I do this for a living, pay for my family, life and I'm very good at what I do. Hence why I've done this, in one way or another, for over 30 years. I'm not here to get **** on nor am I just make this **** up because I'm mad at Chrysler and want someone else to pay for my repairs which have been caused by my neglect! Chrysler ****ed up when the designed the oiling system on these engines!!!

Me too; here at LXF, we make a concerted effort to deal in facts that can be verified.

 

[Hemissary]

No yet but hopefully by tomorrow. Block is a 6.1l based 6.4l from Arrington.

What does this mean?

Was this block modified by Arrington?

 

[Hemissary]

There's really no way to know. It's like the valve seat on the older 5.7s. it's claimed to be caused by overheating, by the mds, by Bigfoot, etc. No one really knows. I've known people who never overheated, charged their oil every 3k miles, and the seat dropped. I've known people who have hammered on theirs, only charged the oil when it got black, etc. No issue. Same with this lifter issue. No one knows the root cause. You can baby it and it could break, you could hammer on it and have it live. The way I see it, you can be paranoid about it, or you can keep your car maintained and enjoy it. Your call. But just because some guy on the internet claims he knows better than the engineers who designed it and thinks he knows how to prevent it doesn't mean anything.

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk

Well said Dart; the worst thing to do is to fall for the online hand-wringing that sucks unsuspecting Members into worrying about - nothing. Or worse - acting(!) on that fear and getting sucked (for example) into the vortex generated by fools who drink their own and everyone else's bath water and recommend blending / mixing / matching oil and oil additives, to support a fear mongering spin cycle, all based on anecdotal evidence (as in no facts or root causes).

 

[Hemissary]

Give it time. I'm not saying, just like with the lifter failures, it will absolutely happen. However the chances are better it will happen than not since the engine has been overheated at least once. Of course I see the worse of everything in vehicles and EVERYONE claims they treat their vehicles like baby carriages and they're maintained to the highest standard by their "private mechanic"! However, when I see their "properly maintained vehicle" the torque strut bushings are falling out of the vehicle, there's no oil in it, brakes are metal to metal, MIL is on, diff oil has NEVER been changed and is water fouled, etc etc etc!

Once again, more exaggerating bullsh!t. These are definitely the words of a salesman :^(

"We" as in we here on this forum know about press-fit and the correct tolerances and how it is very likely some heads were machined incorrectly, or the inserts were machined incorrectly or they were improperly installed. Again - overheating might(!) assist - ever so slightly - a questionable seat / head interface to fail. And no, if the seat didn;t move during an overheating event - what makes you believe it will somehow move during a serviceable condition?

You've now (admittedly) blown waaay outta proportion lifter failure numbers, believing the lifters and / or camshaft are suspect and about(!0 to install a fourth set of lifters when the last two failure have already - by their failure - blatantly pointed out to you that something other than the lifters / camshaft are the problem.

Your credibility is pretty well shot...

 

[Hemissary]

Not to get in the way of the fist fight here guys, but maybe take a step back. If you aren't working in the R&D department for Chrysler you probably won't know the answer to the riddle and speculation does nothing for anyone. Even worse is arguing over speculation. What I will contribute to the conversation just comes from what I have read, some of which is testimony from an engine re-builder. Their proclamation about valve seat failures was that there was a supplier switch and nobody noticed that the interference fit between the seat and the head was less than adequate. Most of the time it doesn't show up as its enough, but under enough expansion (due to overheat, and sometimes just age) the seat can drop out. This isn't that far off of how they insert the seats to begin with. They are chilled (to shrink) and then put into the head. Sometime after they figured it out the seats were corrected and the problem disappeared. I suspect the issues with lifters follow a similar situation with supplier quality. There are more than a fair share of high mileage Hemi's running around without lifter problems and the problem seems to be more prevalent to a section of years. IE similarly built lifters. Maybe it was a roller issue, maybe it was something else, but from what I read its likely in the roller. With all that said, there isn't a point in pointing fingers at idle time or how you drive the engine. A flaw leading to a failure generally is based on the number of cycles and the loading. Regardless, if its going to happen, it will probably happen. In my experience with parts failures from suppliers, its usually confined to a batch or a change made. Its likely that many/most engines built in this time frame will never experience a failure while the unlucky few will.
I also agree if you have had multiple failures, there is probably another smoking gun leading to it. One of the first posts I read talked about using 0W-40 oil. I don't think our engines are rated for anything other than 5w-20. Oil change intervals, temperatures, etc all play a factor. But in your case maybe a machining issue. In situations like that, its best to have an expert machinist check everything.

Great points; just to clarify;
- MDS engines --> 0W20
- Increasing oil viscosity does not translate to an increase in bearing interface integrity
- Observed increase in oil pressure while using a higher viscosity - does not translate into an increase in bearing interface integrity (it simply slows migration across the interface - thereby absorbing more thermal energy).

During previous lifter failure discussions on here (that can be found using the search feature), I eluded to the number of components present in our lifters that make the odds of some failures inevitable (no matter what Contractor / car Manufacturer). For example batch metallurgy of the rollers prior to machining / truing (flaws).
-

 

[Hemissary]

Well with that logic losing 1 or 2 lbs of oil pressure at idle and at operating temp really shouldn't be an issue. Yet for some reason I've seen more than my share of destroyed engines due to that very thing! I wonder why that it.

So I'll ask you, just like did with the other, "Great! Well you seem to know so much about the issue, why don't you tell me what the issue is thereby allowing me to take care of it?!? I mean obviously my knowledge of working with these vehicles/engines everyday for the last 10+ years can't begin to compare with your knowledge as an air fuel boss and radial engine rebuilder. Please enlighten me.

Also, a failure doesn't have to be across an entire product before it's considered an issue. If that was the requirement why has Chrysler extended the warranty on 3.6L left side cyl heads for 10 years or 150000 miles when very few have this failure?

And as a side note, actually physics and chemistry were two of my best subjects which allowed me to get a full ride to William and Mary. However, in your case, logic and critical thinking were obviously not encourage nor taught wherever you attended.

You keep introducing unrelated information trying to win a non-existent argument to support your original premise; that's called Strawman Concept.

Please explain how oil pressure delta has an effect on oil sling from crankshaft counterweights.

 

[Hemissary]

HOW IS LACK OF LUBRICATION NOT RELATED TO BEARING, of any kind, FAILURE???

I'm not saying oil pressure has ANYTHING to do with the windage effect/oil sling of the crank. What I am saying is loss of lubrication due to low pressure, low volume, etc can and will cause damage to bearings.

Acceptable hot idle service pressure is 5psi. So...

 

[Hemissary]

Yeah via the book. But let's be honest. If you saw 6psi at idle you would not think oh thats well within reason.

Still. I do not see how his oil psi argument has much to deal with the crank sling deal. if 1-2 psi is the killer of an engine at idle than there was other issues.

On a 200K plus, maybe. Above idle / under load dynamic pressure, as we know, would be much different.

Agreed; as we both read the comment - it was pointing to sling :^)

I posted an article showing how to increase service pressure to move across the bearing interface quicker (as you know - its not a volume increase).

I think I've read enough responses now (no prior research either in own back yard or on here, zero data to back up purported claims, admitted exaggerations, lack of Hemi engine operation knowledge, Strawman tactics, indignance in order to obfuscate and marginalize / insults) to realize this conversation is not going to go anywhere productive. I'm running outta steam (unless! the bullsh!tting continues - Membership deserves better)...

 

[Hemissary]

If your case is taken on, at that time, your lawyers are going to want feedback from others. That would be the time to come back and provide the members with your lawyer's info so people can provide their experiences. IMO, asking for opinions beforehand was an error. If you feel strongly about it, them move forward on your own and with your documentation from your clients.

Agreed; the Lawyer will want actual (gathered) statistics of known failures (real numbers with real supporting documents), the end-user contact information supporting those stats - before a / any Lawyer would even entertain even the viability of case acceptance.

 

[Hemissary]

Actually that's what I've been doing. I've collected a bucket of failed lifters so far, and continue to do so, along with the copies of their repair orders. I was just coming on here to see if anyone here would be interested in participating (provide RO's, parts invoices, damaged lifters/cam, etc). I don't want someone, who has had a verified lifter/cam failure, to miss out on a possible reimbursement. The next thing I know BOOM!!!

I would like to throw my 2 cents in:

Being a Pro mechanic I think I am entitled? maybe not lol but still I have an opinion on the Failures I seen on the internet. The design itself of the Valve train geometry is Poor! The Lifters are riding at an extreme flat angle and the lifters dont have a Large enough Oil grove in the Lifter to coat the entire bore in there full travel action.

This lifters I removed from 194K mile 5.7 show light scoring on the upper and mid sides from the lifter bore due to a Lack of oil film from being pushed into the sidewall of the lifter bore by the action of the cam.

The Roller Tip damage and Lobe damage I have seen on the internet I believe is caused by the Lack of splash oiling in the engine itself, The 6.1 uses Oil injectors to help cool the pistons this doesn't help the Lifters roller BUT it does Point to the inherant problem that the engine design does suffer from a Lack of splash oiling.
Generally splash oil is relied on in the industry for cam lobe oiling and Piston cooling and lubrication.

I am going to look into the possibility of adding the Spray tubes to the bottom of my piston bores like the 6.1 has, I am also planning on using Crower lifters that have a Larger oil grove for the lifter bore and have also been EDM drilled to oil the Roller tip.
High Performance Hydraulic Roller Lifters Mopar Hemi 5.7L & 6.1L with Edm - Lifters

Another thought was to eliminate the the Oil pan seal Windage tray that acts like a Pan cover to try to allow more oil to splash into the Crank shaft to try to throw more oil around, one more idea that I plan to do is add a Higher pressure and higher volume oil pump to try to increase oil flow pushed out of bearing surfaces.

Generally increasing splash oil is a Bad thing in most any engine let alone a Hi performance engine but in my case I am building a Low RPM engine that will see more low rpm off road miles than Hiway miles increasing splash oiling would be a Good thing Let the Oil control rings do there job.

As far as a Class action lawsuit goes good luck! I remember many of us who Bought a 2006 VW TDI diesels tried and lost, The BRM 1.9 has Bad cam design flaw with extreme cam lobe angles which cause it to eat Cam and liters every 100K miles, Its just a fact of life VW TDI owners live with and just plan to replace the Cam every 100K miles when its time for a Belt change any more.
I tried a expensive Hardened Chrome plated cam in the engine it still ate it!
I have 300K+ miles on it now and I am going on my third cam! The Head is off at machine shop being rebuilt now.
I get 41 mpg with it @ 80mph with the AC going up a 5500' 6% grade without slowing down so I am not complaining much, over all it is still a reliable 100K mile car.

Oh I am not going to go back through so many pages to clarify so many nit picking arguments. I give up. Your 100 years of knowledge and bucket full of lifters have defeated me. Cookie is in the mail.

Now I realize why no one else has responded here.

This is what they are thinking.

Sorry guys. Hope I was at least kinda entertaining. Did at least raise my post count up though!

Nice effort, but there's too much bullsh!t to unpack in the last number of the OP posts; you can't push a rope.

p.s. if you look carefully, dudly and maddog are the same user...

 

[Hemissary]

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.[/QUOTE\]

Always worthwhile to expose lies and get the facts out there for public consumption. Seeing how the Moderators are in on this thread, it appears(!) they agree.

Can't help those who are disgruntled by facts :^)

 

[Hemissary]

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

You would do well to actually read the thread. I've been on here longer than you, I haven't seen "all these lifter threads" you claim to have read on here. So post them.

When you DO read this thread, you'll likely come to the same conclusions the rest of us did. The OP:
- Is about to install a fourth(!) set of lifters / cam - into the same block
- Bullsh!tted through his teeth about "millions of lifter failures"
- Then retracted the statement - but went on the bullsh!t run again and again
- Refused(!) to listen and acknowledge any of our contributions
- When bullsh!t failed he resorted to insults and marginalizing not just us - but every Member on this Forum.

As to my learned background; are you very smart? WTF does this have to do with the price of tea? Clearly - your goal in this thread is to marginalize.

Instead, like most on here do, f'n read what I write and use critical thought, critical reasoning and - if needed - confer with others who actually(!) know their sh!t. It should go without saying; if someone can show where I'm in error / wrong, I'll be the first person to acknowledge and - if needed - apologize.

So...where am I wrong in this thread please. You better have real facts...not innuendo as we kept reading over and over in this thread.

 

[Hemissary]

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.

I don't recall you pointing a / any smoking gun either. I know I didn't. We've touched on potential root causes (in no particular order):
- Poor machining (passage registering); namely the passageways for either top-down or side oil supply
- Passageway blockages (poor QC)
- Materials issue; given just how many there are, the individual roller integrity (proper base materials, heat treat / quench processes)

Gen 3 Hemi Camshaft Failure Mystery Explained! - YouTube
Here's a video there's a design flaw Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Old school thinking being applied to modern engine design. Have you looked at a / any Hemi casting - specifically access to the voids (or lack thereof) between the crank and the camshaft?? Do that - get back to us.

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

Flippant - unproductive.

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?

Hear hear :^)

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

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

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 :^(

I agree regarding the term design flaw versus QC / product consistency. For example, it is possible the lifter operating angle (Shallow) could be a design flaw. Still - the lifter is not the root failure. Batches of blocks that were not machined correctly and starve, for example the #5 lifter assemblies, is a QC issue. Another design issue could be a marked drop in dynamic operating pressure due directly(!) to oil galleys that are upstream --> downstream (resulting pressure drop is worse for certain lifters). I have no expectation of an FCA employee admitting to me; "yes - we've determined cylinders x, x, and x operate at a consistently lower dynamic pressure - which is still above the required threshold to maintain proper valve lash, but during extended hot-idle can begin to starve the roller needle bearings" ;^)

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

The OP promised - his numbers are above reproach - in the millions! I talked to Techs across four local Dealerships, along with others I know in-industry; they laughed at the "millions" of failures. To date - zero evidence has been put forth. As to a class action lawsuit getting off the ground - in any way shape or form, I have a significantly better chance of becoming the all-round "nice guy" that everyone just loooves and adores on here :^)

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

Hear hear...

 

[Hemissary]

<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 :^)