Anyone thinking of buying Dodge..........check this first

Page 1 of 3  
http://www.daimlerchryslervehicleproblems.com /

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
justme wrote:

Not you again! Looking at JDPowers or Edmunds the 2004 Dodge Ram 3/4 ton outscores both Ford and Chevy in almost all catagories for reliability.
I'm sure if you look you'll find similar websites for any auto manufacture.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
This is the first time I've posted here.........so I don't know where the "not you again" is coming from. Here's my experience with a Dodge Dakota I bought new in '99. Before the warranty (60,000km) expired: 1. Paint peeled off front bumper. 2. Seals in A/C were replaced. 3. Transmission shift linkage replaced. 4. Front upper ball joints replaced. Dealer told me it would take awhile to get all the "bugs" out.
After the warranty had expired: 1. Battery replaced (4 years old) 2. Waterpump 3. Both wheel bearings. 4. y pipe on exhaust. 5. cruise control stopped working 6. Front rear seal on transmission 7.Flimsy Dodge box liner warps when sun shines on it. 8. Transmission pan rusted out. 9. Transfer case leaking fluid. 10. Seat belts won't retract. I've done the recommended maintenace on this lemon since day one. I use this truck to travel to work and have never had it off road. The few times I've used it to go on a trip (never over 1000KM) something major has gone wrong.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I bought a 99 Ram new. Here are my problems
BEFORE Warranty expired
1. NOTHING
AFTER Warranty:
1. Flat Tire

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
I bought my 99 RAM new.
BEFORE WARRANTY EXPIRED:
1. Steering system return hose rubbed against pulley, disabling power steering (repaired)
2. Left door speaker stopped working, wiring harness replaced
3. Had a couple of recalls, did not act on one (regarding hood latch).
AFTER WARRANTY EXPIRED
1. RWAL sensor went bad 2. Had to replace batteries about twice (my fault)
I tow a 3,500 lbs boat trailer occasionally.
i

--


Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Would a bad RWAL sensor cause the following symptoms:
(1) Brake indicator lit on the dash. (2) ABS indicator lit on the dash. (3) Cruise control cuts out occasionally (twice in about 100 miles this morning) (4) Speedometer operates normally. (5) Brakes appear to be operating normally - I haven't had the opportunity to try any panic stops.
I checked the ABS fuse (visual) and it doesn't appear to be blown. I don't want to go buy a meter if I don't have to.
Thanks, Greg
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
could do any one of those
--
Max

Give a man a match, and he is warm for a short while. Light him on fire, and
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Thanks, Max. I guess I'll have to stare at the lights until I get back home in a couple of weeks and hope nothing else goes wrong with it. I'm out of town and don't have time to work on it right now.
Greg

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Swap it with a known good fuse of the same rating.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

DID NOT HAPPEN TO ME

Mine was erratic , only operating at high speeds.

yes
I do not see a lot of alternatives to buying a code reader... other that stopping by places like autozone that offer you free code reading (hoping to sell you parts).
i
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I'm calling BS here. Paint and body are covered for 12k only. If you got it fixed under warranty, thats a GOOD thing, and commendable action on DC's part.

So?
More BS. exactly how did it get broken? This is a dealer prep check item, if it broke, YOU broke it.

Finally an issue that is real. And they replaced them under warranty. Sounds like everything went right on this issue.

And thats possible, as it is with all mechanical devices.

Normal wear item at 4 years, so friggin what?

So? Its not unheard of at 60k plus.

Both? Which ones? Were they maintained properly?

I smell abuse of vehicle.....

Electronics fail anytime they want.

??? what you called it does not exist. Normal seepage is not a leak. How bad was it?

So get a real one. Dodge didn't design, nor manufacture, the box liner. Its not a DC issue.

BULLSHIT.
Normal seepage or draining on the ground?

ANd theres no user problems there?

I think you are full of shit. Your list screams of someone being too picky while abusing the vehicle. At least one problem couldn't happen.
--
Max

Give a man a match, and he is warm for a short while. Light him on fire, and
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

What does this have to do with the price of tea in China? It still pealed of which is not exactly a sign of quality.

Sounds like cheap rubber seals to me.

LOL, now you are the one giving BS. Dealer prep item, LOL!!! That doesn't mean they actually even looked at it and how exactly did he break it?

Really, how many time have you brought your vehicle back to work out these "bugs". Sounds to me like even the dealer saw this particular vehicle as a lemon.

That is still a fairly short time for a failure. Sounds like DC trying to save a buck at the customers expense again.

Please explain.

LOL, especially when they are made from sub-standard parts.

What exactly is normal seepage. I never see so much as a drop under either my wifes Intrepid or my 240SX which is a relic compared to his vehicle.

BS. They were the ones who installed it for top dollar, they should be responsible for what they sell although this may be a dealer specific screw-up.

What do you call "normal seepage"?

Why is everything he has a user problem?

If you had these many problems with your vehicle, I think that you would develop a similar attitude. With the exception of the POS rear axle and the now pealing paint, my truck has done very well for me. Every company is capable of producing a lemon, hell, that is the definition of Ford
--
If at first you don't succeed, you're not cut out for skydiving



Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Here we go again, you don't want to address the issue. The issue is DC's customer service, not how the paint peeled. But hey, lets look at this... the paint pealed on a bumper. Now, how is it that the paint got to peeling? Could it be that he HIT something? We don't know, because he doesn't say. Hard to find fault with anyone if the facts aren't presented. But one fact was presented: DC fixed the problem. DC 1, justme 0

They all use the same seals, as refrigerant is kinda picky about what it'll eat through and what it won't. But until the facts are presented, this could be nothing more than a random failure. But DC apparently fixed the problem. DC 2, justme 0

Sorry, it DOES mean they actually looked at it, because part of prepping a new vehicle is looking at the underside for damage caused in transit, including linkage. Then, it must be test driven AT LEAST 10 miles, and I'll bet the linkage worked then. As such, it was broken after being sold. So the owner broke it, and DC replaced it. DC 3, justme 0

Actually, in the case of my 2000 Ram, it saw the dealer 11 times for a pull to the right. In my case, the dealer was the problem. On one visit, I told them about the problem, it was put on the service order, and when I picked it up, the problem was still there. Said the service manager, "well, we didn' know about it." "Funny," I said, "YOU friggin typed it in to the service order, so SOMEONE knew about it."
As to whether or not this vehicle was a lemon, I'm calling BS on that too. None of the problems were with the drivetrain, and none of the problems were anything that kept the vehicle in the shop a majority of the time it was owned.

Rubbish. In order to prove that, you'd have to prove that the majority of water pumps failed at that interval. As it is, we don't know why it failed, but it did. Its not unheard of, and its no one's particular fault.

A y pipe is very hard to get to rust out due to heat. Further, its pretty tough to hit the ground with it. So if it failed, its probably from some sort of activity with the truck that is above and beyond the normal scope of operation and design.

And I'm sure you have proof of this? Yup, thats right, you need PROOF when you make claims like this.

Have you checked the fluids lately? Maybe they're so low they aren't seeping. Or maybe its the dirt that clumped onto the wet spot that keeps it from dripping. I haven't seen a vehicle yet that didn't seep a bit of fluid at the 60-100k stretch. Evidence is the dirt clinging to the drivetrain.

Bingo. And furthermore, its something you can check on before buying "flimsy" stuff.

Because if he didn't use it, it wouldn't fail, it would be brand new. DUH. Walked into that one, didn't ya? Regardless, seatbelt retraction is generally fouled up by one of two things: 1) twisted/tangled belt, 2) foreign matter fouling the webbing of the belt.

All of the problems he mentioned are normal, save for the BS about a rusted out trans pan, which even you walked away from. Most of this stuff is just pain in the ass stuff, and it sucks that it happened, but its NOT a lemon. As to "this many problems", I've had my truck to the dealer over 15 times total for front end issues (shocks, two new steering boxes, track bar, intermediate shaft). I don't think Dodge built a bad truck, I think the dealer kept a shitty service manager.
--
Max

Give a man a match, and he is warm for a short while. Light him on fire, and
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Actually Maxi, it is you that chooses not to address the issue. Many of the problems should not have happened at all or at least not in the fairly short time frame that they did. It seems that you blame everything on the owner and you don't know the whole story either. Back to that double standard once again, I see.

Wrong. It should not have peeled this early in the trucks life.

I don't think that he would be complaining if the paint pealed due to damage as that would sorta be expected but hell, you know everything, right? The paint is now pealing off of my hood and it was never damaged and washed regularly, is this my fault as well?

No, the dealer fixed it, DC screwed it up. DC 0, dealer 1

LOL, complete BS. Things fail for a reason and sub-standard parts and or assembly comes to mind.

Random failures are usually caused by reduced quality controls that were corrected by the dealer. DC 0, dealer 2

Once again, you are talking out of your ass. When I got my truck, it had a large patch of paint worn thru on the roof where a chain from the car carrier got it and they didn't catch it. I saw it two days after I took delivery when it was parked under my office window and I could see the roof and they washed the truck prior to my picking it up. Now even if they looked at the shift linkage, not all defective parts are obvious. A hairline crack or defective casting can easily look good but be very weak and not every part that is defective fails immediately. If all defective parts were easily detectable and failed immediately, there would be no need for a warranty past the first day of ownership.

You are kidding, right? I could probably get a coat hanger to work for the few times the linkage was used during that "test drive", LOL.

Back to spin once again. While it did break after being sold, that is not the same thing as the owner breaking it. BTW, you still didn't expalin how the owner could have done it other than just trying to make it perform it's function, IOW, it was defective. DC 0, dealer 3

LOL, feel free to hide behind the legal definition of a lemon. Lets just say that the dealer probably knew that this particular vehicle was going to have a lot of problems.

Not at all. A reduction in quality control will cause a small percentage more to fail prematurely while saving money, pretty much like the sub-standard bearings DC decided to use in the 9 1/4 rear. They don't all fail, but enough do to be noticable. As for fault, if it was just the pump, I would agree but when you add in all of the other problems that this vehicle is also having...

Or it could simply be a sub-standard part not up to what was required of it, pretty much like the shift linkage. Like YOU said, both of these components are hard to abuse so if they failed, it is more likely due to substandard components. DC -1

The proof is simple, there is no other valid reason for this type of failure unless you know of some magical way to abuse a CC unit.

Yep, fluid levels are fine. Are you saying that it is normal for a vehicle to leave a puddle of fluid on the ground? Oh, wait a minute, you did say 60-100K. I guess that you are referring to LEAKAGE due to worn seals and even then, you are talking about wetnesss on the components, not puddles on the ground..

That does not relieve them from their responsibility to install quality components (even aftermarket) on an expensive vehicle. DC -2

No, it would be unused, not new, and still defective., DUH!

No, but you sure did.

Or a substandard mechanism due to quality control cutbacks or cut rate components to save money. The belts in my 89 Nissan still work perfectly and that car has automatic belts, so they move every time the car is used. DC -3

While they may be normal, this many of them in this short of a period of time is NOT normal and is a clear indication of a slipping level of quality control. As for the pan, I don't know what it is made out of on his vehicle so I cannot make any comment there. Now did he get confused between rust and corrosion.

Yes, it is a PITA and completely unacceptable to have so many of them happen to a single expensive vehicle in such a short period of time.

Now this sounds like abuse from the customer. I guess I can see why you blame him for the problems with his vehicle.
--
If at first you don't succeed, you're not cut out for skydiving



Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

No double standard about it. Mechanical things have problems, whether it be in a timely manner or not. The issue is whether or not the manufacturer deals with those problems in a timely and correct manner. According to the OP, the dealer DID address his issues while the truck was under warranty.

Correct, BUT, the issue is STILL the service rendered, not the problem. When you build a million of something, there will be problems of some sort within that million. Thus, its not about whether or not there is a problem, but how that problem is addressed.

The dealer is DC's warranty representative. If the dealer scored on a warranty problem, so did DC.

Dealer acts as representitive of DC, DC retains lead.

So did mine. But unless I miss my guess, the roof is on TOP of the truck, and not on the underside. Regardless, both trucks SHOULD have had the roof looked at for paint problems, as it IS part of the dealer prep process.

Dealer acts as DC representitive, DC retains score.

I assume then, that the dealer had a crystal ball, and looked up this trucks VIN to find that out? How could a dealer KNOW that it would have multiple problems, particularly when the problems are all unrelated, except for owner handling?

Yeah, everything that goes wrong on a vehicle is a substandard part, as far as you are concerned. However, if it were actually true that all parts were substandard, all of these trucks would be falling apart, and thats just not true. BTW, I'm still waiting for you to prove that just ONE of these things you've called "substandard" is in fact, substandard.

LOL, electronic parts fail at any interval, this is why electronic parts bought at a parts store are non returnable. Your proof is lacking.

Yup. Which is why I asked what the OP's definition of leaking was and suggested that it might be normal.

Wrong. They advertise by name those componants, and the standard is "buyer beware."

You are assuming that it was broken when new, and that was never mentioned. Therefore, I made the safe assumption, and figured it had been used. A safe assumption about your common sense would indicate that you didn't use it on this occasion.

Yet more reasonsing that indicates the belts were somehow fouled, not defective. Your still work, why don't his?

Rust IS corrosion. However, aluminum will form a surface oxidation that protects the rest of the aluminum. Trans pans will alst far longer than the vehicle panels, so rust, corrosion, whatever you wish to call it, I doubt it "rusted out".

Which is why it has a warranty, that was admitted to have been honored.

LOL, hardly. Funny part is, when I did finally launch the truck 4' into the air, nothing broke.
--
Max

Give a man a match, and he is warm for a short while. Light him on fire, and
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

This would only be completely valid if it happened to all vehicles and it simply doesn't. Proven mechanical things have problems when things are not assembled properly, substandard parts are use in their assembly, and / or when they simply wear out and this last reason is directly affected by the first two.

No, it is not. I don't care how many times they are willing to fix it if it shouldn't have happened in the first place.

While true, it is also a matter of HOW MANY problems occur with a individual vehicle and over what period of time regardless of how they are addressed. Many of the problems that he experienced simply should not have happened at all within the time frame he gave such as the pealing paint, failed trans linkage, and Y pipe failure which indicate a problem with QC and the parts being used.

Yea, but DC also scored a negative for it happening in the first place so their combined score is still ZERO.

And still gets a negative for the failure, combined score for DC is still zero.

Did they not wash your truck? If they did, then they were probably standing in the bed to wash the roof and could easily see it if they bothered to look.. What makes you think that they pay any more attention to the underside which is even more difficult to look at?

And that is my point. They should have but didn't, even though the problem was obvious. If they didn't bother to see the obvious, what makes you think that they will notice anything else? Crawling under the truck is no easier than looking at the top of it and I would say that a defective part on the shift linkage is not all that obvious to begin with after all, the linkage had to work to get the truck off of the carrier to begin with.

DC also cause of failure with defective parts, score canceled.

Why would the dealer say what he did? It would be better to instill confidence in the buyer, not give warnings. I would suspect that this dealer was getting many of this particular vehicles in for excessive warranty work and figured that this would just be another one and he appeared to be right.

LOL, not really. But when a particular part is difficult if not impossible to abuse such as a Y pipe, what other cause of pre-mature failure could there be?

LOL, that is where standards and QC come into the picture. You all or nothing mentality really doesn't help you here. I never said that ALL of the parts used were substandard, just an increasing number of them probably due to cost and QC.

Actually, you need to prove otherwise. I have asked a number of times exactly how the customer could have caused the failures and you have yet to come up with a single reason. Instead, all you say is that sometimes this happens which is complete bullshit. Everything happens for a reason and if you cannot come up with a customer related reason, then it has to be the part or assembly itself which indicates a substandard part. I await you proof otherwise.

LOL, I used to work in an auto-parts store and an electronic supply that is not why they are not returnable.

Sorry Max, but that term is used to protect people from low-life salesman and second rate businesses. If you have a reputation to maintain, you simply don't resell junk. I can usually tell the quality of an auto-parts store by the quality of the tools that they sell. Garbage tools usually indicate cheap second rate parts as well. Are you saying by buyer beware that DC and it's dealers are low-life scumbags that people need to be wary of?

No, I said that it may be a defective part and even defective parts can work for a little while, they just can't hold up to the daily demands expected from them for any period of time.

But all it was is an assumption. Not all defective or substandard parts fail on the first use as demonstrated by the shift linkage.

Because mine were built with high quality components to deal with what was expected of them, his possibly were not or they were simply defective. If they are so easily fouled, then they are a substandard part not up to dealing with what is expected of them. I still can't figure out why you go out of your way to make my points for me.

Rust is a SPECIFIC form of corrosion and does not apply to all metals.

That is not always true and depends on both the quality and thickness of the metal and the conditions it is exposed too.

I am not arguing with you on this point. Since I haven't seen it, I have no way to know if it did or didn't but if the pan were too thin in some areas for whatever reason or the material was contaminated, it could fail due to corrosion in a thin or contaminated spot which would once again make it a defective part. Sounds like another possible QC issue too me.

Warranty or not, the customer still has to deal with the loss of the vehicle while it is being repaired. Did the dealer give him a free loaner car while this one was being repaired over and over again?

4' into the air huh, sounds like abuse to me :-) although that is not the point. The point is that if he were complaining about front end problems like you were, that could be attributed to customer abuse unless it was happening to a large number of vehicles like in the case of the ball joints on this vehicle. Most of his actual problems would be hard to blame on abuse as the parts involved are not easily subjected to abuse which leads to problems with the parts themselves and the high number of failures in a relatively short period of time doesn't say much for the quality of this vehicle.
--
If at first you don't succeed, you're not cut out for skydiving



Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

so, it is expected that there be perfection in all things? whats your excuse then?

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I didn't say that but there has to be a limit on the number of failures over a given period of time and this seems to be a bit excessive. Just because they are willing to correct it doesn't make the number of failures over a short period of time acceptable. If your Ram had problems every few months that required it to be back at the dealer for repairs that could take days to complete I believe that you would have a very different attitude.

I don't have one and never claimed to be perfect, what about you?
--
If at first you don't succeed, you're not cut out for skydiving



Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
TBone wrote:

You base DC reliability on 1 vehicle? Too funny.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Nope, but this particular vehicle appears to be a POS and the fault appears to be that of DC, not the customer.
--
If at first you don't succeed, you're not cut out for skydiving



Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.