Received a response to my note to SRT regarding spun bearing issues

[swexlin]

Resh, until recently, there was no tearing down of engines. If it went, a new one was sent pretty quickly. After two weeks, in the past, your new engine would have been on its way, at least, and maybe already in. I think there are two things happening here

1. FCA has cracked down on the warranty, thus requiring the dealers to tear everything apart first. I imagine the dealers hate this too - they have to assign a tech to take the whole thing apart, plus store your car in their shop. I know that my dealer, which is huge, still has limited space to store a car if it is torn down. They want to fix the car, and get it out of there asap.

2. A shortage of engines. With Viper production sold out, they are probably having enough issues getting engines for new cars on the line, let alone replacement ones for existing cars.

I agree, contact a lemon attorney, and get the ball rolling, if nothing happens this week.

[reshetov]

Yeah SWEX the situation at the dealer is exactly as you describe. What's tough about this whole thing is, my car is a 1 of 1 so if I don't get it back I wonder what the options would even be. Would they allow me to order another one? Maybe, if people were still able to order a Viper but since that's on hold (or completely done) that wouldn't be an option. Would they push me in the used route, which I've never heard of with lemon'd cars, because how do they then decide if the replacement is enough of a "equivalent".

Also, reading up on Lemon Law, best case scenario they don't give you a full credit back, they prorate the miles, and on top of that I would lose the tax payment (about $10k based on the price of the car). So assuming them getting me another car wouldn't be on the table, I wonder if the only option would then be to take the hit and see if I can find another car from a dealer that has already ordered them or has one on the lot. In which case it would probably never be 100% exactly what I would order which is the reason I went with 1 of 1 to begin with.

Has anyone on here or anyone know anyone that actually has a successful lemon law story with a Viper? I've never heard of one but would be curious what their experience was.

By the way, I haven't seen this comment yet from anyone but, is anyone worried that if they have had their engines replaced it will then not be a numbers matching engine and hence diminish the future value of the car?

[swexlin]

We have discussed numbers matching, and I think it only matters to a very small number of buyers, honestly.

However, you are correct, no more 1 of 1 - your replacement car would have to be one already built, and to try to find on you like. With Viper production done, this is the only option if you want to stay with Viper.

[Martin]

As far as matching numbers, unless you're 20 years old and plan to keep the car until you're 80, matching numbers won't mean a thing.

The whole 1 of 1 problem is what's got me worried, too. If I ended up with a car that had to be lemon lawed, I'd seriously be bummed because it is a special car. I'd probably take the cash and just go with another car - some of the used exotics are looking pretty good. Sure, it wouldn't be a Viper that I'm passionate about, but I've seen some exotics that I think I could get passionate about...

Let's hope it doesn't get to that. I would think that FCA is hammering on the block manufacturer to get their act together. I'm also thinking that they're looking at going back to the old Gen IV block manufacturer to spool up their manufacturing process to get through this mess and generate some bullet-proof blocks like we used to have. That would seem to be the better business decision - losing good-will with an angry horde of passionate owners, and spending big bucks in litigation that will be very public, is a lot more expensive than just biting the bullet and handling the problem like they should.

[AZTVR]

What's the corporate identity of the block supplier?

Grainger & Worrall in the UK, was selected to do the Gen V block, according to Maurice Liang's book.

According to a trade magazine article and seemingly confirmed by a thread on this forum, some amount of machining of the engine blocks is performed in Canada by Linamar who also reportedly does the Corvette blocks.


What has not been published is what is "the root cause" of the failures. Often, the term "debris" is used; but that is not specific. Some have said that it is casting sand that is the "debris" left in the engine. There have been one or more posts that blamed engine failures on metallic debris that appeared to be due to the machining process. I don't know if metallic debris could also result from the casting process. From my reading of the forum, their appears to be likely 3 or more root causes.

[ViperGeorge]

Some notes on the Magnuson-Moss Act from the SEMA site:

"In a Consumer Alert issued by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), the agency confirmed that “The Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act makes it illegal for companies to void your warranty or deny coverage under the warranty simply because you used an aftermarket part.” The alert outlines key provisions in the law that provides protections to car owners. As defined by the FTC, an “aftermarket' part is a part made by a company other than the vehicle manufacturer or the original equipment manufacturer.”

“The FTC’s reference to aftermarket parts is equally applicable to specialty parts,” said Russ Deane, SEMA’s General Counsel. “Under the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act, the warranty cannot be conditioned to a specific brand of parts, services or vehicle modifications unless those parts or services are provided free of charge.”

The alert notes that a consumer has the right to patronize independent retail stores and repair shops for parts and service without fear of voiding the new car warranty. The dealer/vehicle manufacturer has the right to deny a warranty repair but they must demonstrate that the aftermarket part caused the problem. The warranty remains in effect for all other covered parts.

The FTC alert may be downloaded using this link: http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/edu/pubs/cons...ts/alt192.shtm.

The alert was issued in response to an FTC complaint filed last August by the Automotive Aftermarket Industry Association (AAIA), Automotive Oil Change Association (AOCA) and the Tire Industry Association (TIA)."

This information is consistent across virtually every reference site I checked. Bottom line FCA cannot void the warranty UNLESS they prove the replacement part caused the failure. This was confirmed by the FTC. Given this anyone that has an engine warranty denied due to the Arrow Controller should get a lawyer.

[Martin]

The problem with Magnusson Moss is the emissions side of the law - which is a totally separate argument. A manufacturer can use the "modified or otherwise disabled emissions related components" clause in the warranty agreement to screw with an owner's warranty rights. Once you disable the emissions (which I'm assuming the Arrow PCM does), you're opening up a whole can of worms that you don't want to open.

Sure, you can force FCA to prove that the Arrow PCM caused the problem (which they can't do), but it's almost moot because the warranty has already been voided because of the emissions side of the warranty terms.

[Pappy]

"some amount of machining of the engine blocks is performed in Canada by Linamar who also reportedly does the Corvette blocks."

This gives me a bad feeling in the pit of my stomach. As the owner of multiple C6 Z06 Corvettes with LS7 engines, I have been living with the threat of valve failure since 2006. The consensus by KaTech and several other credible sources is that the issue is inaccurate machining of the valve seats. Guess who did the machining -- see below:

"This lack of concentricity, also known as “valve seat run-out”, is caused by inaccurate machining of the cylinder heads. The GM supplier for machining and assembling the LS7 heads was Linamar Corporation of Guelph, Ontario, Canada."

Pappy

Edit: There is an on-going class-action law suit against GM for the issue, and I am sure that will involve Linamar. The issue is complicated by the restructuring of GM after the bankruptcy and the "who do you sue" question.

[ViperSmith]

Yeah SWEX the situation at the dealer is exactly as you describe. What's tough about this whole thing is, my car is a 1 of 1 so if I don't get it back I wonder what the options would even be. Would they allow me to order another one? Maybe, if people were still able to order a Viper but since that's on hold (or completely done) that wouldn't be an option. Would they push me in the used route, which I've never heard of with lemon'd cars, because how do they then decide if the replacement is enough of a "equivalent".

Also, reading up on Lemon Law, best case scenario they don't give you a full credit back, they prorate the miles, and on top of that I would lose the tax payment (about $10k based on the price of the car). So assuming them getting me another car wouldn't be on the table, I wonder if the only option would then be to take the hit and see if I can find another car from a dealer that has already ordered them or has one on the lot. In which case it would probably never be 100% exactly what I would order which is the reason I went with 1 of 1 to begin with.

Has anyone on here or anyone know anyone that actually has a successful lemon law story with a Viper? I've never heard of one but would be curious what their experience was.

By the way, I haven't seen this comment yet from anyone but, is anyone worried that if they have had their engines replaced it will then not be a numbers matching engine and hence diminish the future value of the car?

Check up on your tax, almost every state you get all taxes and fees back as part of the lemon law.

Which state did you buy the car in? 2doorrocket has done it a dozen times.

[ViperGeorge]

The problem with Magnusson Moss is the emissions side of the law - which is a totally separate argument. A manufacturer can use the "modified or otherwise disabled emissions related components" clause in the warranty agreement to screw with an owner's warranty rights. Once you disable the emissions (which I'm assuming the Arrow PCM does), you're opening up a whole can of worms that you don't want to open.

Sure, you can force FCA to prove that the Arrow PCM caused the problem (which they can't do), but it's almost moot because the warranty has already been voided because of the emissions side of the warranty terms.

I don't think that is really an issue. You can install an off road part for a High Performance Driving Event and then remove it. I the cases of the two denied warranties my understanding is that the Arrow controllers were not even installed at the time of the failure. How would they prove the controllers were on at the time of the failure unless the Arrow Controller was still on the car when it was towed to the dealer.

[Patgilm]

By the way, I haven't seen this comment yet from anyone but, is anyone worried that if they have had their engines replaced it will then not be a numbers matching engine and hence diminish the future value of the car?

I was thinking about picking up a T/A recently and to me, I would rather buy one with a replacement engine if one of the big dealers here did the work (that is if it is confirmed that FCA knows what the problem is and it is fixed). The numbers matching thing might be worth more at Barrett Jackson 20 years from now with a low mileage car maybe but for me driving the car today, give me the replacement engine for piece of mind especially if the warranty period is over.

[Martin]

I don't think that is really an issue. You can install an off road part for a High Performance Driving Event and then remove it. I the cases of the two denied warranties my understanding is that the Arrow controllers were not even installed at the time of the failure. How would they prove the controllers were on at the time of the failure unless the Arrow Controller was still on the car when it was towed to the dealer.

I agree with you that it "shouldn't be an issue" but believe me, when you go to war with someone like FCA, they'll use every possible argument in the book. The other thing I meant to mention (chemo brain got the best of me - sometimes I forget things ) is the odometer clause. This one is even more onerous because technically the PCM is part of the odometer system. It isn't in the spirit of the odometer clause in the warranty, but you can bet your bottom dollar that FCA will claim that the PCM was not installed/uninstalled in a manner that is consistent with what the warranty calls for. My guess is that there is a very specific re-calibration routine that they need to follow in order to make sure the PCM matches the dashboard odometer - and if that routine is not followed, then it opens the door to FCA saying the odometer was tampered with.

This is just from a guy who isn't a lawyer but has been around the block a few times with litigation. Lawyers are good at what they do, and they definitely do press an unfair advantage against those of us who aren't lawyers. In many of these cases, they'll latch onto one little thing that they know can turn a case in their favor, and they'll play that out for all it's worth.

I've decided that I'm not going to do anything to my new ACR-E that could possibly jeopardize the warranty. I'm not going to get so paranoid that I only use Mopar parts on it and have the oil changed by the dealer, but I'm not going to screw with the engine or emissions systems at all. It's just not worth it from what I'm seeing as of late.

[G37Sam]

Having been in your "lost engine" shoes, I can definitely attest that that is tragic, and i'm sorry for your loss. However, allow me to play devil's advocate here:

1) Since Dick Winkles is an ex-viper expert who spent endless R&D hours developing this PCM to make sure it's safe and doesn't knock (vs other PCM's or custom tunes) which is something they heavily market and brag about, why hasn't he gotten permission from FCA (given his contacts) to make this mod not void warranty?

2) Put yourself in the dealer's shoe or even FCA's, a car comes to you with a failed engine and aftermarket parts. How are you going to prove that the PCM wasn't the cause? And why should the dealer allocate resources trying to come up with theories as to why the engine failed when it has been tampered with? My RB26 in an older car knocked on the dyno till it lost a bearing due to a clueless tuner, can you 100% rule out the PCM didn't cause this? As a dealer, am I going to waste my valuable mechanic's time trying to take the engine apart praying FCA will reimburse me for all these hours just because Dick Winkles is a celebrity and his work should be blindly trusted to be perfect? These are all thoughts that go in the dealer's head. They're just a business, not all of them spend time on this forum or read the VOA magazine to know who Dick Winkles or Arrow is. Car comes in, they sell it, follow the service manual to service it and follow the warranty claim process to warrant it. Pretty much a vending machine unfortunately.

Again, I'm sorry for your loss but this is a risk we all take when we mod our cars, especially when you replace a vehicle's brain.

[ViperSRT]

Very good devil's advocate. Clearly engine calibration can affect peak cylinder pressure (and is generally the reason owners obtain a different calibration), which in turn can impact bearing wear. That is just plain factual. Peak cylinder pressure is a primary input for material selection and characteristics of a bearing. I have seen many engine teardowns and having a definitive cause of failure is a dream not normally realized. Even the presence of debris is not proof of that as a failure mode as many bearings survive debris related damage without catastrophic failure.

I feel for you also as I will be joining this same group shortly when my 2017 is delivered. But for anyone that modifies their vehicle they are taking the risks related to it. I know as I put a supercharger on my Gen 3 before warranty expired. I did not expect the warranty to cover engine failures and that was a risk I took willingly.

[Martin]

What makes this such a polarizing, contentious and infuriating issue is that these engines were grenading quite a bit on their own. If they were totally bullet proof (like previous gen engines) and the only failures were related to the Arrow PCM, most of us would just say "meh, you popped on an aftermarket PCM, those things control some very complicated engine functions, and it's on you because nobody else is having problems...".

But, since so many engines have grenaded for various reasons totally unrelated to the Arrow PCM, this comes across as a very bad faith effort of FCA to shirk their duties as a responsible manufacturer.

If it goes to court, and expert witnesses testify over the multi-year process that this will take, I'm 99% sure that the Viper owners will prevail. What's infuriating is that it's come to that. It's a symptom of the disease that's afflicting FCA right now with respect to many things - all of them related to dollars and cents. Talk to any FCA brand owner, and they're seeing the same scrutiny on warranty repairs.

There IS a reason why Fiat stopped selling into the US market years ago... To this day, Fiat is a dirty word to many people, and when I learned that Fiat was taking over Chrysler, I had a bad feeling that things would go this direction. At least with Daimler, despite their arrogant and stupid management style, they stood behind their product no questions asked. Fiat, on the other hand, has learned how to "dodge" their duty to support their product. Their product has, from the very beginning, had problems - and when you deal with pissed off customers for that many years, it becomes part of your corporate culture to deal with the problems in a way that is least expensive in the short term (long term, insurance covers safety defects and/or negligence).

On the safety standpoint, god forbid any of us should be in a situation where the engine grenades, and it causes an accident which leads to loss of life or serious injury.

[Pappy]

FWIW. I am more interested in making the engine bullet proof than I am in who pays for the fix, and I generally try to stay out of the warranty discussions, but I did see something with another manufacturer (Ford) that points toward auto manufacturers' attitudes regarding ECM changes/modifications. Ford has released several TSBs regarding the issue and their flow chart below (from one of the TSBs) shows two paths toward having the warranty claim denied. One is if the modification can be shown to have caused the damage (Magnusson-Moss), and the other is if it can be shown that the aftermarket PCM was re-flashed (or replaced????) to remove the aftermarket tune. In the latter case it appears they do not intend to have to prove that the tune caused the damage. Don't know that this proves anything, but it kind-of speaks to the industry's mindset regarding ECU changes.

Pappy

Ford TSB.docx

[TrackAire]

FWIW. I am more interested in making the engine bullet proof than I am in who pays for the fix, and I generally try to stay out of the warranty discussions, but I did see something with another manufacturer (Ford) that points toward auto manufacturers' attitudes regarding ECM changes/modifications. Ford has released several TSBs regarding the issue and their flow chart below (from one of the TSBs) shows two paths toward having the warranty claim denied. One is if the modification can be shown to have caused the damage (Magnusson-Moss), and the other is if it can be shown that the aftermarket PCM was re-flashed (or replaced????) to remove the aftermarket tune. In the latter case it appears they do not intend to have to prove that the tune caused the damage. Don't know that this proves anything, but it kind-of speaks to the industry's mindset regarding ECU changes.

Pappy

Ford TSB.docx

So it would seem the most dangerous car to buy (not just Viper, but pretty much any brand/make/model) is a used unit that still has factory warranty but may have had a chip, tuner or pcm swap before you bought it and then put back to stock. Although we are concerned about Vipers, back in December I bought a new truck at a Ford dealership. When doing the paperwork, both the sales manager and finance manager were young guys and both were bragging how they just bought the new F150 with the Eco Boost motor and had already chipped them and were over 400 hp with minor mods. I asked if they were worried about the long term effect of increased boost, etc and what if it popped under warranty. They both said they turn over their vehicles so quick that there weren't too concerned about it. So now the next guy that buys this one year old F150 which should still have 2 years and the balance of miles on the warranty will be shit out of luck if he takes it in for an issue and a scan proves that the truck was chipped at one time....by, by warranty.

I do think that when buying any newer vehicle, especially one that you expect or require a warranty on, it would be wise to have a dealership run a scan (or whatever they do to determine if the vehicle has been pcm modified) and document this in writing for future reference.

[reshetov]

Check up on your tax, almost every state you get all taxes and fees back as part of the lemon law.

Which state did you buy the car in? 2doorrocket has done it a dozen times.

So actually this brings up a good point, because I bought the car through Woodhouse which is in Nebraska, picked it up at CAAP, but I live in New Jersey so it's registered here. To make matters even more interesting the dealer that has my car now is in Pennsylvania, although that should be irrelevant to the lemon law situation. The dealer has been supremely helpful but all they are doing is following the direction of some "warranty rep" from FCA.

So which Lemon Law would even be applicable here - New Jersey or Nebraska? Below is the one from New Jersey and on page 8 the "Refund" section mentions how they do it but tax isn't listed as part of the refund.

http://www.njconsumeraffairs.gov/New...f-Brochure.pdf

Here is what I found on Google for Nebraska, and it says in order to qualify the vehicle must be purchased in Nebraska. So I guess maybe this is what would actually apply here.

http://www.dmv.org/ne-nebraska/autom.../lemon-law.php

If it's New Jersey, the vehicle has to be out of services for at least 20 days and I would have to give them at least 2 chances to fix the issue (right now is the 2nd time it's at the dealer). The Nebraska rules say it has to be more than 40 days out of service and it has to have been at the shop at least 4 times for the same repair. Seems Nebraska really allows a lot of leeway before someone can submit a claim.

Because it's a 1 of 1 and a special car I am really hoping it doesn't come to this, and seems the only thing I can do at this point is just wait. Since the car is stock I don't imagine they would give me trouble for it being warrantied, but they're certainly taking their time in giving the dealer the official go ahead to pull the motor. I would imagine there will be more waiting this week, and if there really is a shortage of motors, god only knows how long it would take for them to actually send a new one once the decision is made.

[Terminator02]

Very good devil's advocate. Clearly engine calibration can affect peak cylinder pressure (and is generally the reason owners obtain a different calibration), which in turn can impact bearing wear. That is just plain factual. Peak cylinder pressure is a primary input for material selection and characteristics of a bearing. I have seen many engine teardowns and having a definitive cause of failure is a dream not normally realized. Even the presence of debris is not proof of that as a failure mode as many bearings survive debris related damage without catastrophic failure.

I feel for you also as I will be joining this same group shortly when my 2017 is delivered. But for anyone that modifies their vehicle they are taking the risks related to it. I know as I put a supercharger on my Gen 3 before warranty expired. I did not expect the warranty to cover engine failures and that was a risk I took willingly.

I agree with everything you said. I think where some owner's frustrations reside is that, unlike your previous rock solid gen lll engine, they feel they are sitting on an engine that's been spinning bearings every model year: stock or not. I think that's what ends up recapitulating this topic ad nauseum.

It's not that owners aren't willing to mod and have risk, rather the risk feels too high given that engines have spun bearings on many stock cars. If the engine was like our previous 1-4, I don't think so many people would be upset. I risked factory warranty by switching cars and I'll have to live with the consequences if a problem arises but many people don't want to risk it and aren't too happy with the option of basically having to remain stock in order to keep the warranty active. Unfortunately I don't see anything changing so people have to start to analyze the reality of keeping a stock vehicle and be safe or mod and modulate ones anxiety over an engine issue.

[keeptrying56]

I sure hope someone at SRT is paying attention to this forum. I retracted a deposit on a Gen V several months ago due to the spun bearing issue. I applaud Tony for stepping up and letting us know what some of the root causes are. The truth is finally shining through despite early threads on this topic being deleted. Motor issues are now popping up monthly.

Let’s do the real math on this topic for the bean counters at Chrysler. FCA may have saved some money in the short run by denying warranty claims and covering up this ugly topic. Take note!! Your most prized loyal customers paying six figures for a Dodge halo car are frustrated and outraged. When you look at how small the Viper community is and the long term damage being done Chrysler is going to lose even more money in the end. Brand loyalty is priceless.

[Terminator02]

I sure hope someone at SRT is paying attention to this forum. I retracted a deposit on a Gen V several months ago due to the spun bearing issue. I applaud Tony for stepping up and letting us know what some of the root causes are. The truth is finally shining through despite early threads on this topic being deleted. Motor issues are now popping up monthly.

Let’s do the real math on this topic for the bean counters at Chrysler. FCA may have saved some money in the short run by denying warranty claims and covering up this ugly topic. Take note!! Your most prized loyal customers paying six figures for a Dodge halo car are frustrated and outraged. When you look at how small the Viper community is and the long term damage being done Chrysler is going to lose even more money in the end. Brand loyalty is priceless.

I'm not happy with FCA but at the same time I think the gen V viper is still the best exotic sports car proposition out there. The chances of not having an engine replacement are in anyone's favor based on numbers. If one needs to fix an engine not covered under warranty it's still cheaper for me to do that and still have a car that I find to be at the top of the food chain with very few rivals. Plus overall maintenance is cheaper. It's also the reason I just purchased a 2016 SRT Jeep. $70,000 is much easier for me to swing than 110k-140k for a rival that offers slightly better performance. Plus I find the SRT jeep to be the best aesthetic performance truck as well.

So while I'm not happy with FCA and many of my posts reflect this, I also am not letting that impact my what I consider very solid purchases for my own personal driving experiences. I don't mean to be disrespectful as I think your post is well intended but I'd be spending time on the forums where I am going to be purchasing a vehicle instead of one where I'm not purchasing anymore.

[FLATOUT]

Had a stock 2016 come into my shop 2 weeks ago with a spun bearing. FCA has required us to remove the motor and tear it down to the combustion chambers prior to approving the warrantied engine replacement. They still haven't approved the new engine.

It's a problem and FCA needs to help those affected, similar to how they've handle the R28 recall and the warranty extensions on those cars.

[swexlin]

Had a stock 2016 come into my shop 2 weeks ago with a spun bearing. FCA has required us to remove the motor and tear it down to the combustion chambers prior to approving the warrantied engine replacement. They still haven't approved the new engine.

It's a problem and FCA needs to help those affected, similar to how they've handle the R28 recall and the warranty extensions on those cars.

Exactly. Until recently, a new engine was sent right away. Now, the dealer has to assign resources to tear everything down, wait for FCA, store the car. This takes time, resources, and storage space away from the dealer as well. It's BS. FCA needs to stop with the stonewalling on stock cars, and send a new engine, pronto.

[Terminator02]

Had a stock 2016 come into my shop 2 weeks ago with a spun bearing. FCA has required us to remove the motor and tear it down to the combustion chambers prior to approving the warrantied engine replacement. They still haven't approved the new engine.

It's a problem and FCA needs to help those affected, similar to how they've handle the R28 recall and the warranty extensions on those cars.

Andy what do you think their rationale is for tearing down the engine as that's not seemingly about mods? Any idea? What a pain in the ass for you all.

[ViperGeorge]

I sure hope someone at SRT is paying attention to this forum. I retracted a deposit on a Gen V several months ago due to the spun bearing issue. I applaud Tony for stepping up and letting us know what some of the root causes are. The truth is finally shining through despite early threads on this topic being deleted. Motor issues are now popping up monthly.

Let’s do the real math on this topic for the bean counters at Chrysler. FCA may have saved some money in the short run by denying warranty claims and covering up this ugly topic. Take note!! Your most prized loyal customers paying six figures for a Dodge halo car are frustrated and outraged. When you look at how small the Viper community is and the long term damage being done Chrysler is going to lose even more money in the end. Brand loyalty is priceless.

Go to the SRT Contact Us page and send this same note to them. If more of us do this maybe they will get the message.