2017 Gen V s Silence is golden

[Angleiron]

Was it necessary to be checking the oil levels in the same way as it was for the Gen II's with forged pistons? I am trying to compare apples to apples as it does not make sense that the forged pistons in the Gen V are the reason for what has been happening when the Gen II had the same type pistons and no engine failures like this that I am aware of.

[Policy Limits]

Oil consumption was one concern. That's why there was an oil consumption recall. Engine contamination was another. Some oil filters had shavings in them on failed motors. The manufacturer issued another recall wherein an oil sample was shipped to detroit for a test to determine if there were metal components in it. If there were, you'd get a new engine. A block cleaning station was installed at the plant. There are examples involving inferior assembly, others involved blamed suppliers. At the end of the day they either don't know the cause or they do and haven't released it. Either way, we don't. It's a roll of the dice car consequently. Have a pretty girl kiss the dice before you roll if u decide to play the game.

[ViperSmith]

Will all be moot in 180 days when the production plug is pulled. Can't wait for that to occur.

Best hope you don't have a lemon, because you won't be able to get a replacement.

[Bruce H.]

If you can acknowledge that some or many failures were likely a result of low oil levels, both from lack of adding oil as required before the first scheduled service or prior to the R29 mod, then you will see that it 's not nearly the roll of the dice some fear. Not sure how significant or necessary the R29 mod was on some cars, but I can tell you that mine was done around 20,000 miles and there was little evidence of oil escaping even after doing many track days.

[AZTVR]

Was it necessary to be checking the oil levels in the same way as it was for the Gen II's with forged pistons? I am trying to compare apples to apples as it does not make sense that the forged pistons in the Gen V are the reason for what has been happening when the Gen II had the same type pistons and no engine failures like this that I am aware of.

IMHO, there is no point in focusing on one single thing without knowing any of the underlying facts. Just because someone posts something doesn't mean that all of the relevant facts are in play.

I find it interesting to read everyone's opinions, and there seems to be some knowledgeable people here; but, we have experienced people saying different things, based on their background. Or they just say a small part of what they are thinking. Just because two different model years use forged pistons doesn't mean that the design and materials and method of production of those pistons are the same. Are their expansion rates the same? Are they the same diameter? Are the piston rings grooves the same size? Are the piston rings used the same size, edge shape, material? Is the tension the same? Is the cylinder wall machined and honed the same way?, etc.

One can not take one gross difference and extrapolate a root cause other than for pure entertainment reasons. ( Which is OK. That is mostly what this conjecture is good for.)

I have been in the business of root cause determination for 30 years and usually it is at least 2 things (usually more) which combine to result in a gross failure.

[ACRucrazy]

That's because you've never pulled a 3000 mile Gen V dipstick and found it dry. It happens...fact. And it happens because many owners don't read their manual when they first get the car, or until they need to reference something specific, and they have zero idea that this engine can run low on oil before the first scheduled oil change. Owners bringing Vipers in for service with low oil levels are the norm according to a Viper Tech I spoke with, not the exception. Many owners just don't check...but probably start after blowing an engine!

If you're waiting for owners to post here about how they blew their engine through negligence I think you'll remain in denial for a very, very long time.

What about the 1,200 1,400 and 1,500 mile 2016 engine? Quarts low during a "normal break in procedure"?

[uberpube]

What about the 1,200 1,400 and 1,500 mile 2016 engine? Quarts low during a "normal break in procedure"?

You are also assuming the oil also got checked at PDI and was completely full when it left the factory. The way my Jeep drank mobil 1 0w40, it wouldn't surprise me that many of the failures were low oil level casualties. Even though I seemed to have cured the Jeeps thirst for oil by playing with different brands and viscosity, I still check it every time I drive it.

[swexlin]

I think most would assume that the oil was full when it left the factory. Yes, mistakes happen at the factory, but I don't think that very many left the factory already low.

I check my oil every 200 miles, on the flat in my garage, within 5 minutes of shutting down, so there is consistency. At 11,600 miles, I'm using about 1 quart per 1000 miles (assuming the hashtag on the 13 dipstick is a 2 quart range). I bought the car with 7200 miles on it, so I have no idea what the usage was in the first few thousand miles of its life.

[Bruce H.]

ACRucrazy,

No, that is hopefully quite unlikely, and therefore it's reasonable to assume that these few may very well be among the failures from a cause other than low oil. All of my comments in this thread are to combat any perception that a large percentage of these engines are ticking time bombs. That's a fear and a theory often repeated by some who we already know have an axe to grind, by those who read the forum and repeat what they've read posted over and over... and by a couple of non-Gen V owners that shamelessly knock the V at every opportunity.

I'm not suggesting there aren't any bad engines, but if it's anywhere near 6 engines out of the entire production run for 2016 then I think that's one more reason to stop crying wolf. I asked a ways back if anyone knew of any tracked cars that had blown and Ralph's was the only one beside one that was know to be run out of oil.

So rejoice...instead of spending a lot of time posting doom and gloom on this Gen V forum, you can buy one with confidence and post about its remarkable virtues and reliability!

[Policy Limits]

Best hope you don't have a lemon, because you won't be able to get a replacement.

Wrong Harold. By law manufacturers are required to carry parts years later even if out of production. Half of a decade power train warranty: check.

Also Reached 100 miles On the odometer today!! The break in period is under way!!! Yahooooo!

[uberpube]

I think most would assume that the oil was full when it left the factory. Yes, mistakes happen at the factory, but I don't think that very many left the factory already low.

I check my oil every 200 miles, on the flat in my garage, within 5 minutes of shutting down, so there is consistency. At 11,600 miles, I'm using about 1 quart per 1000 miles (assuming the hashtag on the 13 dipstick is a 2 quart range). I bought the car with 7200 miles on it, so I have no idea what the usage was in the first few thousand miles of its life.

I once did PDI's at a Dodge dealership, you'd be surprised at what got missed or half done from the factory, even on the higher end stuff. The dreams of my youth were to either work for Dodge or at a premier dealership. Working at a Dodge dealer actually made me choose another unrelated vocation altogether.

[swexlin]

ACRucrazy,

No, that is hopefully quite unlikely, and therefore it's reasonable to assume that these few may very well be among the failures from a cause other than low oil. All of my comments in this thread are to combat any perception that a large percentage of these engines are ticking time bombs. That's a fear and a theory often repeated by some who we already know have an axe to grind, by those who read the forum and repeat what they've read posted over and over... and by a couple of non-Gen V owners that shamelessly knock the V at every opportunity.

I'm not suggesting there aren't any bad engines, but if it's anywhere near 6 engines out of the entire production run for 2016 then I think that's one more reason to stop crying wolf. I asked a ways back if anyone knew of any tracked cars that had blown and Ralph's was the only one beside one that was know to be run out of oil.

So rejoice...instead of spending a lot of time posting doom and gloom on this Gen V forum, you can buy one with confidence and post about its remarkable virtues and reliability!

Bruce, I VERY much hope you prove to be right! Only time, miles, and years passing as these cars age will be able to tell for sure.

[Policy Limits]

Yup. Apparently 400 miles was the number for problems on a 2017 (see other thread on it) sigh.

[Scott_in_fl]

I asked because it is not too far away that the below will be showing up. My previous Gen II's and my current Gen IV have been trouble free, and it would suck ass to have to deal with what has been going on with the new one.

Absolutely gorgeous!! Well done.

[Stealth78]

ACRucrazy,

No, that is hopefully quite unlikely, and therefore it's reasonable to assume that these few may very well be among the failures from a cause other than low oil. All of my comments in this thread are to combat any perception that a large percentage of these engines are ticking time bombs. That's a fear and a theory often repeated by some who we already know have an axe to grind, by those who read the forum and repeat what they've read posted over and over... and by a couple of non-Gen V owners that shamelessly knock the V at every opportunity.

I'm not suggesting there aren't any bad engines, but if it's anywhere near 6 engines out of the entire production run for 2016 then I think that's one more reason to stop crying wolf. I asked a ways back if anyone knew of any tracked cars that had blown and Ralph's was the only one beside one that was know to be run out of oil.

So rejoice...instead of spending a lot of time posting doom and gloom on this Gen V forum, you can buy one with confidence and post about its remarkable virtues and reliability!

Not trying to be negative here but saying there are only 6 engines out of the entire production year cannot be remotely close to accurate. If some of these engines aren't failing until 3,000-5,000 miles that's scary as well. We are talking about Viper's here, as much as some guys drive their asses off there are an equal amount if not more that don't! Hell I just bought my 08 last year with 1,800 miles on it. There could potentially be more engine failures out there that have simply not had enough time on the engines to see the results. Taking a wild swing here but I'm going to assume half of the 2016 production year cars have not even seen 2,000-3,000 miles yet.

[swexlin]

I put 2000 miles per year on average on my Vipers. I know people who put less. That's why I mentioned above it may take years to see what a failure rate may actually be, and why I hope Bruce is right, and we are worrying for nothing.

[Bruce H.]

Bruce, I VERY much hope you prove to be right! Only time, miles, and years passing as these cars age will be able to tell for sure.

Not trying to be negative here but saying there are only 6 engines out of the entire production year cannot be remotely close to accurate. If some of these engines aren't failing until 3,000-5,000 miles that's scary as well. We are talking about Viper's here, as much as some guys drive their asses off there are an equal amount if not more that don't! Hell I just bought my 08 last year with 1,800 miles on it. There could potentially be more engine failures out there that have simply not had enough time on the engines to see the results. Taking a wild swing here but I'm going to assume half of the 2016 production year cars have not even seen 2,000-3,000 miles yet.

So far 7 2016 Engines were replaced under warranty.

Yes, 3,000 3000 5,800 1,400 1,500 1,200 3,100

I should have said 7 so far. Predicting how many "might" go in the future can only lead to wild theories when we don't actually know much at all. What we think we do know from '13-14 failures is that the bulk of them were at low mileage, many during break-in. I think we also believe there were a lot fewer 2015's affected, and we've hardly hear a whisper about failed '16-17's where many would at least have break-in miles and more on them. The failure rate seems to have dropped significantly.

Everytime we hear of an isolated failure we shouldn't get sucked into the frenzy that we were a year ago. Some engines fail, that's not unique to Dodge...it is what it is.

Owners of earlier Gen V's not covered under the R28 10 year extended warranty might want to put some miles on the car if they're truly concerned, or buy an extended warranty. Very few engines failed beyond ~3000 miles if info posted on this forum can be trusted. Most owners can do that within 4 years...and maybe this additional motivation to do so will enhance their enjoyment of the car!

[Stealth78]

I should have said 7 so far. Predicting how many "might" go in the future can only lead to wild theories when we don't actually know much at all. What we think we do know from '13-14 failures is that the bulk of them were at low mileage, many during break-in. I think we also believe there were a lot fewer 2015's affected, and we've hardly hear a whisper about failed '16-17's where many would at least have break-in miles and more on them. The failure rate seems to have dropped significantly.

Everytime we hear of an isolated failure we shouldn't get sucked into the frenzy that we were a year ago. Some engines fail, that's not unique to Dodge...it is what it is.

Owners of earlier Gen V's not covered under the R28 10 year extended warranty might want to put some miles on the car if they're truly concerned, or buy an extended warranty. Very few engines failed beyond ~3000 miles if info posted on this forum can be trusted. Most owners can do that within 4 years...and maybe this additional motivation to do so will enhance their enjoyment of the car!

I do very much agree that there should be a lot less for half of the 2016 models and all of the 2017 models. Have we all forgotten about the implementation of the wash station, or is that all a myth too??? I highly doubt FCA would implement another step in the engine building process if all the engine failures seemed to have been from low oil. The fact that they did add that procedure proves that there was more to it than just people running their oil low.

[99RT10]

So it seems that the wind is blowing towards the forged pistons as being responsible for the oil consumption, and then due to the low oil that leads to the engine failures. The early Gen II's had forged pistons...so what kind of oil consumption was there with that engine? I don't ever remember hearing about engine failures for these Gen II's?

The oil consumption doesn't have anything to do with the forged piston, but instead with the weak oil rings. I would guess a fix would be pulling the engine, de-burring the block, new/better rings and bearing. But while you're in there....................................

[swexlin]

Someday, one of the "insiders" will write a tell-all book, and then we'll know!

[Bruce H.]

Someday, one of the "insiders" will write a tell-all book, and then we'll know!

Wouldn't that be an interesting read! We can be sure that they've been all over this problem from the beginning when it first appeared, and taken steps to resolve possibly numerous contributing factors. They might have resolved it 99%, but we're all still in the dark, and any current failure naturally makes us wonder and worry. There's probably a very solid reason why the factory hasn't been able to openly discuss the issue.

[Policy Limits]

They'd prolly lose too much dough by recalling them all.

[Camfab]

Wrong Harold. By law manufacturers are required to carry parts years later even if out of production. Half of a decade power train warranty: check.

Also Reached 100 miles On the odometer today!! The break in period is under way!!! Yahooooo!

I'd love to see that law, I have called the California Air Research Board (CARB) as well as the California Bureau of Automotive Repair asking for answers. I was told no law exists. I was specifically given an example of an offending manufacturer and it was a Dodge product. I made no mention of any car that I owned. So if you have proof as you state, I'm guessing your an attorney, it would be a service to all if you can find said "law".

[ViperSmith]

Wrong Harold. By law manufacturers are required to carry parts years later even if out of production. Half of a decade power train warranty: check.

Also Reached 100 miles On the odometer today!! The break in period is under way!!! Yahooooo!

If your car is a lemon they are going to build you a new one out of replacement parts?

If you have to return it, for whatever reason, you are screwed - don't be so quick to pat yourself on the back for production ending.

[Policy Limits]

No they do a buy back in that situation. And would you really want another one after going through something like that? Plant closes in 5 months now, can't wait