New Pentastar V-6 Has a Few Ticks

3.6L-Pentastar V6 II 

It seems that the Chrysler's new Pentastar V-6, slated for high-volume use in the Jeep and light-duty Ram lineups, is suffering from ticking noises in the cylinder heads. Some owners are reporting "ticking" sounds from inside the engine under certain conditions, According to Automotive News

The issue arose after consumer complaints specifically related to the Jeep Wrangler. So far, only 7,500 Wrangler engines have been serviced, and the fix is reported to be fairly simple: replacing the heads with an updated design. Chrysler is fixing the heads wherever needed under warranty at no cost through the automaker's dealership network. Our guess, depending on how widespread this issue is, could likely make take some time as those additional corrective parts will be in high demand. 

There's no word yet regarding any of the Pentastar engines having the same ticking issue when installed in the new Ram 1500. Although Chrysler is not being very specific about exactly what is causing the ticking, the company says the noise can be traced back to several different factors, including the use of bad gas. 

 

Comments

I don't think they would replace cylinder heads just because they tick. An article in another post said some were stalling. Kudos to Chrysler for stepping up and trying to resolve the problem. However around 1.5 million of the engines were produced and according to the following quote they may all have this problem. "You have to have this fuel characteristic, you have to have this drive cycle -- and all of these things have to line up in order to have this situation occur," Lee said. "That's why" the number of potentially affected engines "is so small. If it were a design defect, or if it affected [a basic component] like the integrated exhaust, we'd have issues on everything, which we don't."

I'd say it IS a design defect, and these engines should have a lifetime warranty for anyone who may eventually buy and have this happen.

Wow, came here to read about some truck news, found a bunch of 2nd graders crying. What a waste of a website this is. My Dad can beat up your Dad.

If what I read yesterday was correct about this 'ticking' it required several criteria be meet for these engine to start producing it. It doesn't sound like a widespread problem and the report yesterday stated they had caught up with demand for repairs and it seems all current production is already using these updated heads also. From this I gather it should no longer be a problem and I wouldn't hesitate with purchasing a Pentastar powered vehicle.

Good job Chrysler for stepping up and resolving this; unlike Toyota's oil sludge denial; GM's piston slap.....

Wow, so I guess the Ram boys forgot all about the terrible trannys and bad rears that Dodge keeps cranking out yet want to make fun of Ford and GM. Did I miss something here?

This noise is just an agrivation and is not really a problem. JUST TURN UP THE RADIO AND ENJOY THE BEST TRUCK ON THE ROAD.....EVERYONE ELSE IS JUST SECOND RATE. ESPECIALLY FORD AND GM!!!

GUTS
GLORY
PENTASTAR POWERED RAM

Posted by: HEMI_4U

Right on. Blast some Twisted Sister. PROBLEM SOLVED!!! It's the price we got to pay for driving the BEST IN CLASS RAM!!!

Twisted Sister - Wake Up The Sleeping Giant

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vs5KSQ7RJgY

GUTS
GLORY
WAKE UP THE SLEEPING GIANT
PENTASTAR RAM!!!

Hemi V8, Rally the troops and let's start the attack.

GUTS
GLORY
RAM

@Mechanic

"RAM trucks will be the most reliable trucks on the road"

There is some wishful thinking right there, 30+ years of crap and 2013 is going to be the magical year of reliability because of a light redesign?

What are you Hemi's priest? "Hemi V8, Stay strong, brother.

This does not invole RAM trucks"

This most certainly does involve Ram, they are putting that wonderful dream engine into their trucks and buyers now know the major problem that is/was associated with that engine.

"Hemi, Have faith in the power of ALLPAR, the truth about this and all past and future issues will be posted at allpar. The truth will set you free"

Some one needs to get off his nuts, do you want a room?

People mention the LS architecture and piston slap, the LS motor is one of the most bullet proof motors built. There have been too many to count that have gone well over a 100k being sprayed with a 150 shot every weekend. My 06 GTO had no piston slap nor did it eat any oil. Mom's Denali, no noise nor problems.

@Highdesert

You buy the top of the line Cherokee but can't get the Hemi and 6speed auto? What happened that you got stuck with V6? Don't say 500 mile range, you take average at best V6 gas mileage of 23mpg and just stick a large tank in there to brag. 3mpg better than the Hemi, not worth it...

GUTS

GLORY

TICK TICK


The Pentastar is a nice engine, my sister-in-law just replaced her Lincoln with a new 200 Chyrsler.
Very nice car, great fuel milage & quite.
The only thing that concerned me was only one big exhaust port for the cylinder head.
The exhaust manifold is integeral on the head.
Heat spots would be my main concern.
I know this is one of the most tested designs to come out of Chrysler that has ever been done. It still doesn't beat real world testing in the field.
From what I have read, the concern seems to be limited to a small run of engines.
Chrysler seems to taking care of the problem quickly though.
Thats a good thing.

@Johnny Doe, I really don't give two craps about what years are listed. I've mic'd out Many of blown LS motors in 97 and 98 Camaro's that were comepletely out of proper spec and had piston slap for years prior. You can take that list and shove it where the sun don't shine. We build all sorts of engines. Ford, Dodge, Chevrolet, Nissan, Mitsubishi, what have you. There is no bias here other than I'm a Hemi engine fanatic but none of these are Hemi engines anyway. That website is dead on about the basics. Because GM didn't issue a bulletin for the Corvette doesn't surprise me one bit. We have a 98 Silverado (350) parts truck that has piston slap like it's nobody's business. We also have a 2001 (350) Express van that does the same dang thing. It pounds until warmed up. We Also have a 2005 Expres van with the 6.0 that just HAMMERS when cold. None of those vehilces are on the stupid faux list yet they still do it because they are the SAME engines with the SAME internals as the years of motors listed. As a Mopar guy I really have no problem with Chevy's. Outside of their HD not having a real front axle, I respect old Chevy's. Just not the new ones with piston slap. Ya, they cut the skirts short to save weight so the piston rocks, you know what? Either find a better skirt coating or manage your fuel better so you don't have the carbon build up to tip the pistons. Nobody and I mean NOBODY has this issue like GM. They got so damn penny pinching cheap it's almost treasonous.

http://www.allpar.com/news/index.php/2012/07/fix-coming-for-rare-pentastar-problem

Read the above link. This Pentastar 'issue' is a non-issue as it has been put to bed for good by Chrysler. This is months old news, I expected more from PUTC.

SuperHemi So now you're saying the piston slap website that you posted is wrong? Would you make up you're mind. 1998 chevys don''t have piston slap cause in 1998 they were retooling/buidingl for the 1999s and up! Right now gm is building the 2014 trucks which will be out in spring of 2013
4.8 5.3 6.0 and 6.2 are the motors with piston slap,not the 5.7 350 you make not one damn bit of sense. I am done wasteing time trying to talk to you're air filled head of hemi ticking exhaust fumes. The website you posted clearly states the years and models,and engines with piston slap,and the time they changed their method of manufacturing and/or assembling engines. If you can understand 3rd grader facts then I am sorry for you.

Tyler | Aug 15, 2012 9:12:08 AM, I bought the V6 by choice. There was no V8 in that color and trim available when we spotted this one from I-10 on a trailer in Phoenix.

My wife has a lead foot and does not need to drive a V8. We found that out with her '92 Towncar. She got bagged doing 116 in a 75mph zone on Hwy54.

It was a good thing the State cop who bagged her bought his house from her, else it would have turned out expensive.

Her 2008 Highlander had a V6 and she managed to go fast in that one too. Lucky for her she knows all the cops since most of them bought a house from her over the years.

Besides, my own ownership experiences with Jeep V8s has not been good over the decades. They leak, they smoke, they rattle, they ping, they're dogs, albeit capable dogs.

And cylinder deactivation only complicates things. It shudders, it hesitates, it acts just like the old Cadillac 8-6-4 of the distant past.

This Pentastar has been good for us, so far. Like I said I burn 91-octane pure-gas in it. No ethanol. Once in a great while I put 4 oz of Mystery Oil in the gas tank, but that's all.

Difference here is, whenever I get to drive it, which is rare, I get around 18mpg on a trip, like up to ABQ. My wife is lucky if she gets 12mpg on the same trip. A V8 would not do anything for this Overland.

Right on. Blast some Twisted Sister. PROBLEM SOLVED!!! It's the price we got to pay for driving the BEST IN CLASS RAM!!!

Posted by: HEMI MAN | Aug 15, 2012 8:47:00 AM

Amen my Mopar Hemi brother. Play some We're Not Gonna Take it. RAM IS DONE BEING THE THIRD BEST SELLING TRUCK!!! RAM HAS THE BEST PRODUCTS AND WILL BE THE SALES LEADER IN 3-5 YEARS.

GUTS
GLORY
ON THE WAY TO THE TOP
RAM

Thanks a lot for the share. I am really glad that you shared this page.

Sounds like a lot of GM and Ford guys are threatened from an engine and trans combo that isn't even available in the Rams yet. GM trucks are OUT OF DATE, Ford are soon to be OUT OF DATE.

Mechanic:: you said something about an exhaust leak in a Pentastar, "it had an exhaust leak somewhere before the exhuast manfold" how is that possible, when the Pentastar has NO seperate exhuast manifold, they are cast as part of the head? and therefore not removable?

1998 chevys don''t have piston slap cause in 1998 they were retooling/buidingl for the 1999s and up

@JonnyDoe, Yes they do.. I've heard dozens with slap. GM's old 350 for the last two build years 97/98 ALL had skirtless pistons and had piston slap. They used the stockpiles of those 350's up for the last 2 years of the GMT400 and all cargo vans out till 02/03 until the LS motors went into the vans. The LS motors began without skirts in 97 which went into the Corvette, Camaro and then into the new GMT800 truck for 1999. If find it funny you claim to be some GMC guy yet know nothing about their engines at all. The LS engines came into existence several years before the actual 1999 GMT800 trucks went into production. When they cut the skirts and went to the net build process on those they Also did the same thing to the pistons that went into the old 350's. Same supplier.

FordTrucks1 I never owned them trucks or cars so I never really looked into them.

@Tom - your post would make me worry ""You have to have this fuel characteristic, you have to have this drive cycle -- and all of these things have to line up in order to have this situation occur," Lee said. "That's why" the number of potentially affected engines "is so small. If it were a design defect, or if it affected [a basic component] like the integrated exhaust, we'd have issues on everything, which we don't.""

Lee is saying that this problem could happen to any engine. You get the right fuel (or should I say wrong fuel) under the right load situation/duty cycle and voila - head problem.

I'm not feeling the love here.

That is like the anti-Ford guys bitching about the puked out spark plugs and the pro-Ford guys say it is only a problem if you are a klutz with a spark plug wrench.
Is that problem only a problem if you are not careful removing the plugs?
or is it still a design problem regardless of how well you can change plugs?

Back to the 3.6 - is this a design problem regardless of fuel or duty cycle?

As a consumer - if I was worried about plugs in the 5.4, I would not buy a vehicle with that engine.
As a consumer - if I was worried about some head problem based on the right circumstances, I will not buy a vehicle with that engine.

If this is a fuel problem and duty cycle problem - please tell me what fuel should I avoid, and tell me how to tell if a gas station is providing "bad" fuel.
Please tell me what constitutes a "duty cycle" that will potentially cause harm.

Is this a ticking time bomb for Chrysler? (No pun intended)

Replace the head??? WTF...that is very intrusive to the brand new engine! Yikes...

Stay away...and wait a year or two...IMHO.

guys read why chrysler has not put direct injection on the pentastar V6 yet. carbon build up. so if you use bad gas and you get carbon build up like a mazda rx8 rotor motor that needs to be zinged out every once in a while it is going to run poor and/or tick and the service engine light will come on for emissions. think about it. you know i read an article about why ford has not put direct injection on the 5.0 and it was a similar thing. one engineer said if you don't get perfect, it isn't right. remember pentastar heads have direct injection incoporated into the heads. faulty design maybe? or maybe not good with port fuel injection or emissions problems. maybe fuel isn't completely burnt. possible reasons just think intelligently, chrysler sucks or rules, all car makers have bugs that need to be worked out, including best selling toyotas for example.

Not sure why the ticking is in the Wrangler unless they modified the engine from my 2011 Grand Cherokee with 30,000 miles. I have heard of a couple heads blowing up but not 7,500 like the Wrangler

Lou, Simply put you missed that this is a SOUND issue only. There are no head problems. Nothing that is going to blow up. As others said you can blast some Twisted Sister. Problem solved and you are still driving the class leader, RAM.

@Rocket Scientist er mechanic -
Sound issue?
Really?
I've never heard of anyone swapping out 7,500 heads just because it is a "sound" issue.

VVT - does that stand for Violent Valve Ticking?

Just a sound issue............

http://www.wynterswonderlandbabybowtique.com/item_221/Princess-In-Training-Soother.htm

Buy one for yourself and help solve PUTC's sound issue.

@Lou
I wonder if the valves are striking the pistons crowns.

To provide more torque at lower rpms you would want to open the valves up as far as possible. If the engine has VVT you could change the operation of the VVT to not allow the valves to strike the piston tops.

But this might reduce the engines efficiency.

Adding more lift on the valves would make the engine more tractable.

@Lou
I should have added this is a manufacturing deficiency and not an engineering issue.

That's the only reason I could see a cylinder head be changed. Unless the cylinder head cracked.

@josh: Since you asked, "how many of you would own a car, a v6 car, or a v6 truck?" I have to answer. With one exception, I have not owned a V8 car or truck since 1992. With two exceptions, they have all been V6s rated at 200 hp (which is more than enough for most people even if not enough to tow a 5,000 pound travel trailer). Those exceptions were a 2002 Saturn Vue with the Opel L-4 2.2L engine at 171 horses (Ok, might have been 140-something but you couldn't tell it by the performance) and my 1990 Ford F-150 with the 5.0L Mustang engine in it at--guess what--roughly 200hp.

I'll admit I'm not the typical truck driver that posts to these threads, but I'll also point out that not all of us need or want those huge engines and bodies. I'm running Chrysler's older 3.8L V6 in my current Wrangler and am quite pleased with it. Of course, I also get better gas mileage out of it than most people do, too. I don't drive like an idiot.

You know, it might not be a bad idea for you ALL to calm down and look at the facts.

Ok, so some engines are making noise and some aren't. How many of you follow the "recommended break in" routines that the manufacturer puts into the owners' manuals? I'm willing to bet almost none of you. Neither do I--at least, not exactly.

I've seen cars and trucks within a week of purchase that are racing around the highways and burning rubber on city streets. I see people treating those brand-new cars as if they were in a demolition derby. I see others who are the exact opposite, driving so carefully and slowly that they force other cars around them take risks just to get past them. In fact, I've seen more than I like to admit with rear-end damage simply because they drive so slow. Keep in mind the cars and trucks I'm describing still have their paper temp tags on them with the expiration date in plain view.

Now, an item of interest in my own purchasing and driving habits: I prefer to buy new because I hate trying to resolve issues caused by others' bad habits. Too many times I have been stuck with major engine repairs because the first owner was either too careful or too wild with their vehicle. In fact, one of the used cars I remember most carried an Oldsmobile Rocket 350 under the hood that wouldn't go over 60mph with the pedal floored! No, it wasn't a timing issue--a complete tune up by the dealership proved the engine was in "perfect" condition. It took several hundred miles of trying to force that engine to get past it's self-imposed restrictions before it finally opened up and earned its name. In my own case? Usually within a week of purchase I give the engine a good, long road trip at highway speeds--steady speeds--mixed with a relatively small amount of in-town driving to ensure it's low-speed performance. As a result, I average well over 100,000 miles on the vehicle before any measurable engine work is required.

Why do I mention this? Personally, I'm willing to bet that every one of those "ticking" Pentastar engines were abused from the outset--especially when you consider it's such a small number of claims considering the total number of cars, Jeeps and trucks that already carry that engine. Blame the drivers, not the engineers.

"What's that ticking sound?"

"Nothing, just put some Twisted Sister on the stereo."

"That sound is getting louder."

"Forget it, just turn up the Twisted Sister."

"Wow, it's pretty loud now. Something might be wrong."

"It's just a sound issue, I'll turn the Twisted Sister all the way up."

"CAN'T YOU HEAR THAT HORRIBLE NOISE? SOMETHING IS DEFINITELY WRONG. I THINK YOU SHOULD PULL OVER BEFORE SOMETHING BLOWS UP."

"IT'S JUST A SOUND ISSUE!!! WE'RE STILL RIDING IN THE CLASS LEADER, SO NOTHING CAN GO WRONG!!!"

"how many of you would own a car, a v6 car, or a v6 truck?"

I got started on used IHC pickup trucks with an I-6 and three on the tree, way back in the dark ages when I was young. Owned a few Ford trucks that way too over the ensuing years.

Didn't buy my first V8/Automatic pickup truck until 1988 when I bought a brand new Silverado with a 350 and all the toys.

It was a great truck at that time while at the same time disappointing because of its warranty issues and later maintenance and repair issues.

In 2006 I bought a new F150 XLT with the 5.4. There's just something about the slow turning grunt of any V8, not found in the nervous-nelly high-spinning 6s.

I can honestly tell you, I'm never going back to anything less than a V8, although a bi-Turbo Pentastar mated to an 8-speed automatic would be intriguing. I say intriguing! Not something I would dump my current truck for.

The Ford Ecoboost fans will tell us that Ford already has a truck like that, but I would have to counter that I prefer a normally aspirated V8 in an F150, a 5.4 or even a 4.6 over a forced-induction V6. Preferably a 5.8 (360), 6.4 (390), 7.0 (430) or larger. The bigger the better! A V10 would be grand.

So, in short, it is highly unlikely that I will ever buy a 6-cylinder pickup truck again.

BTW, I own a 2011 Tundra 5.7 SR5 DoubleCab Longbed and it is by far the best truck I have ever owned in my 66 years of living on this planet.

@Vulpine - the 1990 5.0 in the F150/250 was rated at 195 hp. I don't remember the torque figures. You can't or shouldn't compare a 20 year old engine to a current V6. Most of the current "new" V6 engines like Ford's 3.7 or the Pentastar 3.6 would kill most 1990's era V8's.
I purchase a 2010 with 5.4 because I wasn''t willing to trust any of the new Ford engines especially the EB3.5. I haven't heard much bad about it but I'd still prefer a normally aspirated V8. Call it preference, call it what you want.
I do agree that many people do not break in their engines properly. Break in guidelines are pretty vague and generalized. Here is the breakin recommended by Ford for my 2010 truck:

"BREAKING-IN YOUR VEHICLE
Your vehicle does not need an extensive break-in. Try not to drive continuously at the same speed for the first 1,000 miles (1,600 km) of new vehicle operation. Vary your speed frequently in order to give the moving parts a chance to break in. Drive your new vehicle at least 1,000 miles (1,600 km) before towing a trailer. For more detailed information about towing a trailer, refer to Trailer towing in the Tires, Wheels and Loading chapter. Do not add friction modifier compounds or special break-in oils since these additives may prevent piston ring seating. See Engine oil in the Maintenance and Specifications chapter for more information on oil usage."

I doubt that other manufacturer's have anything elaborate for break-in. I did try to follow the instructions for my vehicle as well as any other vehicles I've owned.

@Big Al from Oz - you raise a valid point. It could very well be a manufacturing/assembly flaw.

A few points that were raised on allpar.

1) A first year anything is likely to have problems. Just remember the problems with early 5.7 liter Hemis.

2) The reason for no explanation could be as simple as the problem is associated with a proprietary technology!

3) Unlike the GM issue cited, Chrysler has not denied the problem, only failed to reveal the cause, for obviously good reasons.

4) Non-story?

A problem was found, the problem was confirmed, an investigation was done, a fix was identified, and a fix was implemented.

5) Compared to how things were handled in the past - by many automakers - I would say this is a pretty good story indeed.

6) If indeed it was an issue with the valve seats, it would appear that "a perfect storm" of variables needed to be at work here in order for the problem to present itself - some combination of fuel, temperature, etc.

7) Some people simply go out of their way to find an issue where there is none.


http://www.allpar.com/forums/topic/144259-an-update-rare-pentastar-problem/page__st__260

@rocket scientist er mechanic - can't you Rambo Motards come up with anything intelligent to say all on your own?

#4 and #7 are poor excuses.
7,500 problems is:
a. A definate story, and
b. looks like 7,500 people DID have an issue.

Your cut and paste raises some interesting comments..
1. Issues with the early 5.7's
Really?
Do tell?
You obviously don't proofread your cut and pastes.
2. Maybe, could be a valid answer - does that mean they patented defective technology?
3. Are you refering to piston slap?
According to some of the Rambo Motards - cranking the sterio is all you need to do? Will you offer that advice to GM fans?
4. See above
5. I agree 100% on that one.
6. Perfect Storm?
That whould be what?
Poor gas, Poor driving, Poor Components, or Poor Assembly?
7. See above

@Mechanic

Now, if it was a fuel related issue Fiat would have a press release advising all owner of the affected vehicles to use a higher octane fuel. Very simple and cheap solution.

Also this engine is made by the UAW and in Mexico, which plant did they come from.

The way I'm thinking this is a manufacturing issue, if it was an engineering issue ALL engines would be recalled as the ALL would have the same problems.

I reckon it is either the cam journals were machined in the incorrect position or the cylinder head was over machined. The latter is the most probable.

It is not just a few ticking sounds.

It is stalling, misfiring, the ticking, and check engine lights.

I don't care for how Chrysler is saying it is not a design issue and blaming the customer for the set of circumstances.

There is some design issue because they already designed a new part "with a more robust head."

If there was not a design issue they would have left the design the same.

If there was not a design issue then other drivers with a different make (Silverado, F150 etc) with the same fuel and driving would also have similar complaints which they don't.

Lou, I agree with Mechanic. This is only a sound issue. You bought a Wrangler or truck or SUV. What did you expect? Wranglers and trucks are supposed to be noisy! If it was a design defect, ALL of the Pentastars would have this sound. They all don't. CASE CLOSED! CHECK MATE!

From a consumer perspective, there are some things in the article that really bother me.

One is the fact that they still refuse to give any information as to the cause of the problem. Bob Lee wants to say that this is not a "DESIGN defect", but fixing the problem required a CHANGE in the DESIGN. Duh. To me, statements like that are only meant to deflect responsibility.

Other vague statements, like: "You have to have this fuel characteristic, you have to have this drive cycle...." are intentionally vague, not much more than mumbo jumbo and seem more like an attempt at CYA than getting good info out to the consumer (and the dealers for that matter.)

They want to say it is rare and only affecting 1/2 of 1% of the engines produced, but I would say that even given the number of engine produced that 500/week - 2000/month is significant. They don't want to give the numbers, but it is my feeling that most of the problems lie in the Wrangler head design. Other Pentastars may on occasion have a similar problem, but it is my gut feeling that the majority of this particular issue are Wranglers. If that is the case, then 2000/month in vehicles that have only been out for about a year is almost STAGGERING.

If this is an issue of only happening within certain parameters, then there is absolutely no guarantee that this will show up before the end of a warranty period. Those parameters may not happen until 5 1/2 years.

I appreciate the link to the article, but I have to say it raises more questions with me than it answers.

You gottta hand it to the Rambo Motards saying that this is only a sound issue. LMFAO.
Sound issue from metal slamming/wearing apart which causes misfires/stalling and the heads needing replaced from as little as 3000 miles on an engine.
Chrysler might as well give their former lifetime warranty on the 1.5 million pre redesigned cylinder heads. Or have every dealer have 100 sets on hand at all times.

Lou, Please help me understand this. You are upset that people who use bad gas and drive their cars too hard are not at fault for warping the cylinder? Chrysler is taking it on the chin and fixing the vehicles under warranty and you still have the audacity to call out Chrysler?

wow.

So I bet you hate Apple because less then 1% of the products they make don't work out of the box or Ni ke Shoes because less then 1% of the shoes they sell are damaged...

"Is this a ticking time bomb for Chrysler?"

"can't you Rambo Motards come up with anything intelligent to say all on your own?"

Lou, You might want to mix up your comments a bit, because when you repeat the same stupid ticking time bomb post somebody else posted on the same website from the day before, people have to start believing the truth: that you have absolutely nothing to contribute intellectually and just copy what everybody else is saying. You should make sure that your designated talking points are updated more frequently so as not to embarrass yourself.

GUTS
GLORY
CLASS LEADING PENTASTAR RAM!

@ Mopar
That explains it all. Drive a Mopar too hard or with bad gas and it will need new cylinder heads in 3k miles.
Drive any other manufacturers modern motor too hard or with bad gas and it will continue to run for 300k+ miles easy. Mopar designs their engines to run under ideal circumstances inorder to save costs of their cheaply designed motors. Thank you for that explaination. Be sure not to drive your FIAT too hard Mopards.

@mopard - is there evidence indicating the problem is warped heads?

@class loser - coming from someone who's main comment is guts,glory,ram ....... is pathetic!
I didn't cut and paste the "ticking time bomb" comment.

There is some irony in the fact that your rebuttal about "cut and paste" is a cut and paste.

I hope that there isn't any sharp objects in your close proximity. You might hurt yourself!

The problem is severe enough to replace the cylinder heads. So if it is a valve or valve seat problem it could be repaired cheaper than replacing the heads.

As I pointed out if it was bad fuel then Fiat would advise current operators of the engine to use a high octane fuel.

Is it both heads, or just one from the left or right bank.

This engine should be quite durable as it was designed to run with turbos. This means the heads should be able to withstand a little bit of punishment. With turbos the heads would run a little bit warmer. So warping heads doesn't seem probable.

The single port for the exhaust could be a design feature to make it cheaper to install a turbo.

Fiat is also looking at using this engine in Europe.

Lou, Up your nose with a rubber hose!

Chrysler has been fixing all affected engines under warranty.

ItaliaspeedTV - New "Pentastar V6" production at the Chrysler Group Trenton South Engine Plant

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JWsJki0QXVA

2013 Ram 1500 Exemplifies ' Guts. Glory. Ram.'

When you read about a new car or truck, you really want new; not simply improved or refreshed.

And, that's what the new 2013 Ram 1500 delivers, though it didn't start out that way on the drawing board.

“What started as a mild refresh of the Ram 1500 quickly rolled into a best-in-class fuel economy and best-in-class capability gem,” said Ram Brand President/CEO Fred Diaz.

“We changed every area of the truck – from a newly designed frame with air suspension, to a new eight-speed transmission to a new interior with the next-generation Uconnect® system.

Let's take a look at just some of the kicking-butt, taking-names newness -- otherwise known as best-in-class and class-exclusive features -- of the 2013 Ram 1500. Just watch out Ford, GM, Chevy, Nissan and Toyota!
1.Best-in-class fuel economy •New 3.6-liter Pentastar V-6 engine offers at least 20% better fuel economy when compared to the previous 3.7-liter V-6 powertrain
•5.7-liter HEMI® V-8 with Fuel Saver Technology and variable-valve timing gives you at least 10% better fuel economy when compared to 2012 V-8 powertrain.

2.Class-exclusive eight-speed automatic transmission (TorqueFlite 8), standard equipment with 3.6-liter V-6 Pentastar
3.First-in-segment Fuel Saving Technology: eight-speed automatic transmission, stop-start, thermal management system, pulse-width modulation and active aerodynamics, including grille shutters and air suspension
4.Best-in-class aerodynamics, coefficient of drag (Cd) at 0.363
5.All-new, next-generation Uconnect® Access, combining a new lineup of smart Media Centers with a powerful new wireless platform
6.New remote central locking RamBox® cargo management system and tailgate combined with door locks
7.New exterior design cues including all-new grille/fascia, improved quad projection headlamps and LED front turn signals and taillamps
Check out the web to read more on the Guts. Glory. 2013 Ram 1500.

Lou,

Canadian Truck King Challenge 2012

http://www.youtube.com/user/RamTrucksCanada

And the winner is?

RAM beat out the F150, Sierra, Tundra and Titan. Congratulations to 2012 Ram for being crowned the winner of the Canadian Truck King Challenge. Good job, Ram. You worked for it!

@Spam Trucks Canada - The very 1st truck king challenge was a decent test. The subsequent ones have been a farce. This is old news that was covered by PUTC a while back (a long while back).
It took you 9 months to make this post or does it take Rambo Motard types 9 months to give birth to anything resembling an idea?
2012 Ram 1500 Wins Canadian Truck King Challenge
Posted by Mark Williams | November 10, 2011

@Mechanci - you can't spell? Is that the best insult you can muster?
You dudes do a masterful job of making Ram truck owners look bad. Are you sure you don't work for GMC?



The comments to this entry are closed.