Dodge Intrepid Chrysler 300M Unsafe Steering Problems Failure Defects
by: John Stanley
Chrysler has clearly known about defective and 'dangerous' Steering design in Dodge Intrepid, Chrysler Intrepid, 300M, LHS, New Yorker, Concorde and Eagle Vision vehicles since 1993. Daimler Chrysler knows the entire 'design' is defective and will do everything in its power to avoid responsibility. Chrysler has been under investigation by the NHTSA for more than 55,000 warranty claims for Steering problems with Dodge Intrepid, Chrysler Concord, 300M, LHS and Eagle Vision vehicles and 1,450 reports of steering control problems. Some including complete loss of steering control with 1993-1996 models, reported as of 1999 alone. These statistics do not include 1997 and second generation models (1998-2004) and does not include LH vehicles that may have been brought in for warranty service, where a Chrysler dealer claimed to be 'unable to duplicate' a steering related problem. Furthermore, this report also does not include consumers who may have experienced failures under 36,000 miles past the 3 year factory warranty period, (3 years/36,000 miles whichever comes first). We believe that Chrysler has actively concealed the defect from consumers while deliberately misleading the NHTSA about the defect resulting in the NHTSA closing this defect investigation. Chrysler has had nea rly 10 years to properly address and correct these common problems while Chrysler's patch attempts or attempts to put a 'band-aid' over this defective steering design have failed. The fact is that premature steering rack and pinion failures continue even with newer Intrepids, 300Ms, LHS' and Concordes (2000-2004). Over the years Chrysler has even issued internal Technical Service Bulletins to dealers that 'quietly' and 'delicately' address certain common Steering related problems. January 1, 1997 Chrysler implemented a running change improving the durability and heat tolerance of its inner tie rod bushings in attempt to deal with common steering problems. October 6, 2000 Chrysler also implemented a running change of the inner tie rod connecting bolts with a stronger bolt design, allowing for higher torque specifications in another attempt to deal with common steering problems. We feel that this is not nearly enough for what experts call a 'negligently designed and dangerous ly defective steering system'. We believe this design puts dan gerously high load forces on inner tie rod ends and connecting bolts when steering is turned and that the design of the steering system is not fully compatible with the front suspension system thereby causing or contributing to cause sudden, premature and unnecessary failure of its various assemblies and components. What we suspect tends to happen is that the connecting bolts tend to take the brunt of these forces and either shear off or the threads strip. As Chrysler attempted to put a 'bandaid' over this problem by increasing the strength of the connecting bolts and increased the bolt torque specifications, we suspect that with the increased bolt strength, and connecting strength, the forces then tends to be transferred to the rack and pinion assembly itself, which often prematurely wears out as a result of this design. This is probably why the standard throughout the industry has been an end take off Rack and Pinion steering system. Chrysler did not to follow an industry standard which is far safer and much more reliable. Chrysler has a history of not following safer industry standards as it has done in the past with unsafe Gen3 Seatbelts, unsafe liftgate latches and lack of brake shift interlock on some vehicles. The location of the steering assembly, located in a high temperature area behind the engine, right above the transmission or 'transaxle' could also contribute to or accelerate these failures. The fact that in another bandaid attempt Chrysler revised the Inner Tie Rod Bushings to be more durable and heat tolerant could suggest this. It is alleged in a lawsuit where a mother and her child suffered brain damage due to the steering failure with an Intrepid, that Chrysler rejected a safer, more compatible end take off design proposed by TRW because an Audi had a center take off design and Chrysler wanted an alleged European feel for their LH Platform. However, Audi's had a more compatible suspension design, different steering positioning and geometry where they were not prone to premature and/or sudden failures as LH vehicles. The founder of this website, including many others have had accidents, some serious and could have been killed due to steering related problems. There have even been serious injuries and possible deaths while Chrysler continues to choose profits over putting lives at risk. Chrysler's view seems to be a cost-benefit ratio where it is cheaper to let these circumstances happen where a few people could become hurt or killed and Chrysler doesn't have to pay to redesign and replace all the defective parts. Many consumers have been left to pay an average of $1200 for replacement when beyond warranty. We believe many consumers have been lied to by Chrysler and its dealers through claiming not to have any prior knowledge of this defect and denying responsibility, thereby forcing consumers to live wit h the dangerous condition, sell the vehicle at a loss or incur the expensive of repairing the defects, especially when under warranty to reduce warranty costs and prevent defect liability. We believe Chrysler has pressured dealers to reduce warranty costs, even for common problems and defects where dealership technicians were reluctant to diagnose steering related problems unless the failure was urgent and obvious at the time to push consumers past Chrysler's 3 Year/36,000 mile warranty period. In these cases, a dealer would claim it was 'unable to duplicate' steering problems that were covered whenever possible. This would seem evident due to some consumer complaints stating dealers claimed they were 'unable to duplicate' problems that independent mechanics were able to find and diagnose, such as clunking and wandering. Common symptoms of steering problems with these vehicles are typically loose steering, excessive play in the Steering, vibration, wandering, pulling, steering out o f alignment, difficulty aligning, sudden changes in steering responsiveness, steering wheel doesn't return smoothly and/or properly after executing a turn, steering easier to turn in one direction, excessive tire wear or tires frequently out of balance, clunks, rattle over bumps, rubbing noises or binding. We have had reports of Steering problems developing in nearly brand new vehicles. The average report of Steering failure with these vehicles seems to be about 20,000-70,000 miles. For More Information Visit http://www.dodgechryslersteeringproblems.com
Monday, July 14, 2008
Chrysler 2.7L Problems
Dodge Chrysler 2.7L Engine Problems, Oil Sludge, Defects and Failure
by: John Stanley
From 1998-2000 2.7L Engines are prone to premature catastrophic engine failure due to a defectively designed Timing Chain Tensioner that Chrysler quietly redesigned. Unfortunately, many consumers have had to pay out of their own pockets for this while Chrysler avoids responsibility. From 1998-2004 Dodge / Chrysler 2.7L Engines are prone to Oil Sludge often caused by internal coolant leakage that has to do with the design of the Water Pump that allows coolant to enter the Engine over time and cause oil sludge, experts at a well known remanufacturing company say. The second common cause of engine sludge is from poor oil circulation caused by oil passages that are too narrow causing the oil to wear down more rapidly unlike normal engines. Another contributing oil sludge factor is possibly due to an inadequately designed PCV system that can also accelerate engine oil breakdown, which Chrysler later made improvements to for the 2005 model year along with other changes knowledgeable sources state. Although Chrysler is aware and there is nothing consumers could have done to cause this, Chrysler still regularly blames consumers for 2.7L Engine Oil Sludge. Chrysler is aware of certain problems and vulnerabilities the 2.7L Engine is prone to have and has quietly made various design changes over the years such as redesigning the Timing Chain Tensioner that was prone to premature failure in 2000, to making changes to try and prevent internal coolant leakage over time into the crankcase. For 2005, changes included improvements to the PCV system and for oil circulation, to even later increasing oil capacity by an extra quart in an attempt to make the engine more robust. Unfortunately, even with all of these modifications we have been informed of premature Dodge / Chrysler 2.7L Engine failures in 2006 Dodge, Chrysler vehicle models. Chrysler refuses to cover prematurely failed engines even when under its own 3 Year / 36,000 mile warranty while blaming consumers for these problems. These problems are so common and so well known that extended warranty companies also decline to cover Chrysler 2.7L engines. In many cases consumers have changed or had their oil changed every 3,000 miles with name brand motor oil. Many consumers have been able to provide proof while Chrysler still refuses to cover failed 2.7L engines under warranty. It is a common misconception that sludge is caused by brand or type of motor oil since all motor oil sold must meet the same basic standards. However, if the oil was changed regularly then Chrysler might say 'it must be the brand or type of oil you used then'. If you can prove that you used a leading motor oil, 'where did you have it changed?'. Chrysler might then tell you they are not going to be able to cover it then because you changed your oil yourself or had it changed somewh ere else. In fact Federal Law (Magnuson-Moss Act) prohibits an automobile manufacturer to void a warranty or deny warranty claim based on using aftermarket tune up or maintenance parts, such as spark plugs or motor oil for example or 3rd party service, unless provided free of charge. There are other consumers who have followed the intervals recommended by Chrysler in their vehicle's owners manual that state oil changes up to every 7,500 miles are acceptable in normal conditions where they've changed their oil every 5,000-6,000 miles only to be told 'you didn't change your motor oil enough and your engine failed due to neglect'. In fact, Chrysler even currently recommends oil change intervals of every 6,000 miles for normal conditions in current owners manuals. When vehicles are purchased used from dealers and used car lots where consumers often believe they have no proof of regular oil changes prior to their ownership, Chrysler typically automatically refuses warranty claim s blaming the previous owner. When a consumer has proof or reg ular 3,000 mile oil changes performed by a dealer we've heard of Chrysler going as far as to blame the dealer's lube technician! To find out more and how to fight this, visit http://www.dodgechryslerengineproblems.com
by: John Stanley
From 1998-2000 2.7L Engines are prone to premature catastrophic engine failure due to a defectively designed Timing Chain Tensioner that Chrysler quietly redesigned. Unfortunately, many consumers have had to pay out of their own pockets for this while Chrysler avoids responsibility. From 1998-2004 Dodge / Chrysler 2.7L Engines are prone to Oil Sludge often caused by internal coolant leakage that has to do with the design of the Water Pump that allows coolant to enter the Engine over time and cause oil sludge, experts at a well known remanufacturing company say. The second common cause of engine sludge is from poor oil circulation caused by oil passages that are too narrow causing the oil to wear down more rapidly unlike normal engines. Another contributing oil sludge factor is possibly due to an inadequately designed PCV system that can also accelerate engine oil breakdown, which Chrysler later made improvements to for the 2005 model year along with other changes knowledgeable sources state. Although Chrysler is aware and there is nothing consumers could have done to cause this, Chrysler still regularly blames consumers for 2.7L Engine Oil Sludge. Chrysler is aware of certain problems and vulnerabilities the 2.7L Engine is prone to have and has quietly made various design changes over the years such as redesigning the Timing Chain Tensioner that was prone to premature failure in 2000, to making changes to try and prevent internal coolant leakage over time into the crankcase. For 2005, changes included improvements to the PCV system and for oil circulation, to even later increasing oil capacity by an extra quart in an attempt to make the engine more robust. Unfortunately, even with all of these modifications we have been informed of premature Dodge / Chrysler 2.7L Engine failures in 2006 Dodge, Chrysler vehicle models. Chrysler refuses to cover prematurely failed engines even when under its own 3 Year / 36,000 mile warranty while blaming consumers for these problems. These problems are so common and so well known that extended warranty companies also decline to cover Chrysler 2.7L engines. In many cases consumers have changed or had their oil changed every 3,000 miles with name brand motor oil. Many consumers have been able to provide proof while Chrysler still refuses to cover failed 2.7L engines under warranty. It is a common misconception that sludge is caused by brand or type of motor oil since all motor oil sold must meet the same basic standards. However, if the oil was changed regularly then Chrysler might say 'it must be the brand or type of oil you used then'. If you can prove that you used a leading motor oil, 'where did you have it changed?'. Chrysler might then tell you they are not going to be able to cover it then because you changed your oil yourself or had it changed somewh ere else. In fact Federal Law (Magnuson-Moss Act) prohibits an automobile manufacturer to void a warranty or deny warranty claim based on using aftermarket tune up or maintenance parts, such as spark plugs or motor oil for example or 3rd party service, unless provided free of charge. There are other consumers who have followed the intervals recommended by Chrysler in their vehicle's owners manual that state oil changes up to every 7,500 miles are acceptable in normal conditions where they've changed their oil every 5,000-6,000 miles only to be told 'you didn't change your motor oil enough and your engine failed due to neglect'. In fact, Chrysler even currently recommends oil change intervals of every 6,000 miles for normal conditions in current owners manuals. When vehicles are purchased used from dealers and used car lots where consumers often believe they have no proof of regular oil changes prior to their ownership, Chrysler typically automatically refuses warranty claim s blaming the previous owner. When a consumer has proof or reg ular 3,000 mile oil changes performed by a dealer we've heard of Chrysler going as far as to blame the dealer's lube technician! To find out more and how to fight this, visit http://www.dodgechryslerengineproblems.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
