The contact owns a 2018 ram promaster city. The contact stated while driving 35 mph, the temperature gauge indicated that the engine was hot. The contact added coolant to the engine; however, the coolant was gone in less than two weeks. The contact then stated that while driving at various speeds, an abnormal knocking noise was coming from the engine. The contact stated that the vehicle stalled without warning. The vehicle was taken to a dealer and the contact was informed that the vin was not under recall. The manufacturer was not notified of the failure. The vehicle was not repaired. The failure mileage was approximately 50,000.
Dealer where i purchased vehicle said i have recall for both catalytic converters waited two months called back and they said they wanted to replace engine and i been waiting for a call back for 6 months
The entire dash went black and is no longer operational.
The contact owns a 2016 ram promaster city. The contact stated while driving at an undisclosed speed, the turn signals became inoperable. The vehicle was taken to an independent mechanic, where an unknown part was replaced. The manufacturer was made aware of the failure but informed the contact that there were no recalls associated with the vin. The failure mileage was approximately 68,000.
The front passenger seat belt would not pull out to secure passengers. I took the vehicle to an independent service center to see about fixing the problem. They were unable to fix the device. I was traveling and could not get to my home dealer until i returned. I was unable to take any passengers in my vehicle for safety reasons without a functioning seatbelt. I ordered a replacement seat belt assembly from the dealer and had to wait 4 weeks before the part came in. The dealer was able to replace the old assembly with the new one.
The vehicle rpm reved up and then total loss of power then the vehicle caught fire wile driving down the road. Flames came out under dash and in engine compartment.
The contact owns a 2016 ram promaster city. The contact received a catalyst efficiency campaign program notice for catalyst efficiency; however, the part to do the repair was unavailable. The contact stated that the manufacturer had exceeded a reasonable amount of time for the recall repair. The manufacturer was made aware of the issue. The contact had not experienced a failure. Parts distribution disconnect.
I am not contacting ntsa to report a new safety concern but rather reporting that a fix addressing a known safety concern is not working. The concern is associated with a recall notice of 2015-2018 fca vehicles with 4 cylinder tigershark engines (a pertinent excerpt of the notice is shown below with emphasis added). The recall is to check for excess oil consumption which could trigger a vehicle stall, a serious safely concern. To address this potential problem the recall notice authorizes a oil consumption inspection which basically involves the inspection of oil level on the vehicle’s dipstick after it is driven for a while to measure if excess oil consumption has occurred. The problem with this inspection is that it requires the vehicle to be returned to the dealership after 1500 to 1700 mile interval. According to fca, any exceedance of this short mileage window invalidates the inspection. This is a problem for individuals that use their vehicle primarily for long road trips. The conditions of the inspection are not practical. I contacted fca to authorize the test be completed after 3000 miles (the dealer indicated the test would not be accepted by fca because the 1700 mile requirement was exceeded). They showed no flexibility on the required test parameter and really couldn’t explain why the narrow window for reinspection was technically sound. They had the audacity to state that if i was to have the inspection repeated, i would have to pay for it. The inspection to detect excessive oil consumption presumably resulted from the manufacturer selling defective engines. A two hundred mile window for the reinspection is so narrow that the recall notice to address a potential safety issue associated with the excess oil consumption should be considered a sham recall notice.
The contact owns a 2019 ram promaster city. The contact stated that after experiencing a flat tire, it was discovered that the spare tire could not be removed or released from the spare tire mounting section of the vehicle. The vehicle was taken to the local dealer who cut the tire storage section in order to remove the spare tire. The cause of the failure was not determined. The manufacturer was not yet notified of the failure. The failure mileage was 20,000.
The contact owns a 2020 ram promaster city. The contact stated that after experiencing a flat tire, it was discovered that the spare tire could not be removed or released from the spare tire mounting section of the vehicle. The vehicle was taken to the local dealer who cut the tire storage section of the vehicle in order to remove the spare tire. The cause of the failure was not determined. The manufacturer was not yet notified. The failure mileage was 10,000.