Ram 2500 Investigations

12 ODI actions on file.

• RQRQ25003OPENOpened 7/3/2025
  Post Recall Remedy Brake Transmission Shift Interlock (BTSI) Failure
  POWER TRAIN:AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION

  The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) has received 14 Vehicle Owner Questionnaire (VOQ) reports and 6 EWR Death & Injury (D&I) reports describing post recall remedy failures of the brake transmission shift interlock (BTSI) system in certain Model Year (MY) 2013-2018 RAM pickup trucks.The subject vehicle models include 1500, 2500, 3500, 4500, and 5500 trucks equipped with a column mounted shift lever.The failures of the BTSI described in the VOQs occurred on vehicles that had all previously been repaired under recall 17V-821 or 18V-100.Both recalls address a potential condition which can cause the BTSI locking pin to become stuck allowing the transmission to be shifted out of Park without depressing the brake pedal and/or without having a key in the ignition.Shifting the transmission out of Park when not having the brake pedal depressed can result in a vehicle rollaway. ODI is opening this Recall Query (RQ) to review the effectiveness of the 17V-821 and 18V-100 recall remedies, understand the root cause of additional vehicle rollaway incidents, and identify any other possible root cause that may affect the performance of the BTSI system. To review the ODI reports cited in the Opening Resume ODI Report Identification Number document, go to NHTSA.gov.

• EAEA23001RECALLOpened 3/17/2023
  High pressure fuel pump failure
  FUEL SYSTEM, DIESEL:DELIVERY:FUEL PUMP

  The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened PE21-021 on October 14, 2021, to investigate incidents alleging a stall/loss of motive power as a result of high-pressure fuel pump failures in certain model year (MY) 2019-2020 Ram 2500, 3500, 4500, and 5500 heavy duty trucks equipped with 6.7L Cummins turbodiesel engines. During the investigation, ODI sought to determine if the related defect allegation was limited in scope to the recalled population. After review of information request response materials from both FCA and BMW, NHTSA determined that sufficient information to identify a comprehensive recall population could not be produced by FCA and BMW.During the investigation FCA filed recalls 22V406, 22E048, 22V767, and 22E087 which include vehicles not identified in the initial subject population by ODI. ODI also received recall 21V586, involving loss of motive power due to failed CP4 fuel pumps on certain BMW manufactured vehicles. An information request letter response received from BMW indicated that failed pumps on their vehicles were caused by an interaction between pump internal components and US market diesel fuel, leading to increased slip and eventual particle-generating wear surface. Additional work will be done to identify whether a similar root cause is associated with the FCA recalled population and if similar wear dynamics occur on pumps supplied to vehicle manufacturers other than those included in the recalled population.ODI has upgraded this investigation to an EA in order to 1) determine engineering specifications of internal pump components that are correlated with pump failure leading to loss of motive power or other safety related hazards, 2) identify vehicle populations equipped with alleged defective pump variants, 3) assess if vehicles equipped with alleged defective pump variants result in an unreasonable risk to motor vehicle safety and 4) gather and review any other relevant information related to high pressure fuel pump failure associated with the subject populations of recalls 21V586, 21V880, 21E094, 22V406, 22E048, 22V767, and 22E087.Review of the above information will allow NHTSA to confirm root cause and recall remedy viability, and identify and evaluate vehicle populations equipped with pump components that may pose an unreasonable risk to motor vehicle safety.The ODI reports cited above can be reviewed at: http://www-odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/owners/SearchNHTSAID using the following complaint identification numbers: 11257550, 11351441, 11361603, 11361616, 11365300, 11365426, 11365858, 11366401, 11372337, 11373793, 11374797, 11376793, 11377871, 11378173, 11384377, 11386063, 11387018, 11399710, 11402550, 11415339, 11418868, 11418870, 11427075, 11434276, 11436807, 11437226, 11437249, 11437273, 11437292, 11437294, 11437394, 11437399, 11437403, 11437405, 11437423, 11437528, 11437565, 11437579, 11437580, 11437590, 11437679, 11437744, 11437781, 11437842, 11437993, 11438006, 11438008, 11438121, 11438138, 11438155, 11438392, 11438629, 11439359, 11439879, 11440397, 11443030, 11446542, 11448163, 11453556, 11458918, 11460558, 11469337

• PEPE22012CLOSEDOpened 11/28/2022
  Loss of Brake Performance
  SERVICE BRAKES, HYDRAULIC:ANTILOCK/TRACTION CONTROL/ELECTRONIC LIMITED SLIP:CONTROL UNIT/MODULE

  The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened this investigation on November 28, 2022, after receiving 134 reports from consumers alleging an intermittent or permanent loss of braking performance in certain 2017-2018 Ram 2500-3500 pickup trucks manufactured by Fiat Chrysler Automobiles (FCA). The alleged failures continued to occur at a steady rate across both models, at all speeds, with limited detectability.  Consumers complained that the Anti-lock Braking System (ABS) warning light illuminated on their vehicles.  The ABS module works in conjunction with the Hydraulic Control Unit (HCU), an electromechanical device that controls hydraulic pressure to the individual wheel brake assemblies, to manage braking forces during emergency stops. During this investigation, ODI received over 2,500 consumer complaints concerning ABS or HCU warning lights that illuminated on the dashboards of their vehicles.  Many consumers described also having trouble with cruise control, traction control, or electronic stability control.  Of the complaints received, over 50% mentioned that the ABS or HCU warning light was intermittent in nature. ODI learned that in January 2021, FCA was aware of a problem with the ABS pump motors on the subject vehicles.  FCA had been working with the supplier, ZF, on an issue concerning swelling of the brushes inside the motor.  According to a briefing given by ZF to FCA on January 15, 2021, the ABS, electronic stability control (ESC), traction control system (TSC) and other functions utilizing the motor would be disabled in the event of a problem with an ABS pump motor.  ZF also informed FCA that Slip Control would be inhibited with the driver warning lamp illuminated, base braking would not be affected, and FMVSS stopping distance requirements would still be met. In order to better understand the potential consequences of the brushes swelling and the disablement of the ABS, ESC, TSC and other functions, ODI requested that NHTSA's Vehicle Research and Test Center (VRTC) conduct testing on a subject vehicle with a faulty pump motor installed. During the testing, VRTC found that as the brushes started to swell in the motor, the warning lamp could illuminate intermittently, causing confusion to drivers.  Although the warning light illuminated intermittently, VRTC discovered that the pump was not working properly regardless of the warning light status.  In this condition drivers might think that their vehicle is operating normally when the warning light is off, but instead, the ABS, ESC, TSC and other functions supported by the pump will not work. Following a series of meetings with FCA to demonstrate the findings ofVRTC's testing, FCA conducted an internal review and on November 27, 2024, FCA submitted safety recalls 24V-896 and 24E-100. In view of the recalls being conducted by FCA, ODI has closed this Preliminary Evaluation.  The Agency reserves the right to take additional action if warranted by future circumstances. To review the ODI reports cited in the Closing Resume ODI Report Identification Number document, go to NHTSA.gov.

• PEPE21021CLOSEDOpened 10/14/2021
  High pressure fuel pump failure
  FUEL SYSTEM, DIESEL:DELIVERY:FUEL PUMP

  The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened PE21-021 on October 14, 2021 to investigate allegations of stall/loss of motive power as a result of high pressure fuel pump failures in certain model year (MY) 2019-2020 RAM 2500, 3500, 4500, and 5500 heavy duty trucks equipped with 6.7L Cummins turbodiesel engines.On November 12, 2021, FCA filed vehicle recall 21V-880 and equipment recall 21E-094 on the subject population, identifying an `internally failed component? of the high pressure fuel pump equipped on the 6.7L Cummins Turbodiesel engine that introduced debris into the fuel system potentially causing fuel starvation and consequently an unexpected loss of motive power. Discussions with FCA identified the high pressure fuel pump equipped on these vehicles as the Bosch-supplied CP4. On December 16, 2021, Bosch filed recall 21E-101, stating the pump failure was a consequence of a manufacturer application-specific fuel system design.NHTSA subsequently identified recall 21V-586 involving loss of motive power due to failed CP4 fuel pumps on certain BMW vehicles.As a result of having received multiple recalls related to a common component, from two separate vehicle manufacturers, NHTSA?s focus shifted to determine if the related defect allegation was limited in scope to the recalled population. In early 2022, information request letters were sent to FCA and BMW to determine the root cause and consequentially identify the proper scope of potentially defective vehicles. After ODI received their information request response, FCA filed recalls 22V-406, 22E-048, 22V-767, and 22E-087. During review of information request response materials, NHTSA determined that sufficient information to identify a comprehensive recall population could not be produced by FCA or BMW. On March 17, 2023, this Preliminary Evaluation was upgraded to an Engineering Analysis (EA23-001), expanding the scope to include the Tier-one supplier and any manufacturer who equipped or installed similar high pressure fuel pumps subject to the failures observed in the recall population.The ODI reports cited above can be reviewed at: http://www-odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/owners/SearchNHTSAID using the following complaint identification numbers: 11351441, 11361603, 11361616, 11365300, 11365426, 11365858, 11366401, 11372337, 11373793, 11374797, 11376793, 11378173, 11384377, 11386063, 11387018, 11399710, 11402550, 11415339, 11418868, 11418870, 11427075, 11434276, 11436807, 11437226, 11437249, 11437273, 11437292, 11437294, 11437394, 11437399, 11437403, 11437405, 11437423, 11437528, 11437565, 11437579, 11437580, 11437590, 11437679, 11437744, 11437781, 11437842, 11437993, 11438006, 11438008, 11438121, 11438138, 11438155, 11438392, 11438629, 11439359, 11439879, 11440397, 11443030, 11448163, 11458918, 11460558

• EAEA21002OPENOpened 9/17/2021
  Desiccated Air Bag Inflator Rupture
  AIR BAGS:FRONTAL:DRIVER SIDE:INFLATOR MODULE

  From 2000 through 2017, Takata produced millions of air bag inflators using two types of phase-stabilized ammonium nitrate ("PSAN") propellant -- propellant 2004 and propellant 2004L. After prolonged exposure to high temperature cycles and humidity, inflators using propellant 2004 can degrade, causing the propellant to burn too quickly when ignited. The rapid burning can cause the inflator to rupture during deployment, potentially causing serious or even fatal injury to vehicle occupants. See 2016 Blomquist Report at www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/documents/expert_report-hrblomquist.pdf.Consequently, all frontal inflators using propellant 2004 that do not contain a "desiccant" (a substance that traps and holds moisture) in US vehicles are under recall. These "non-desiccated" inflators either have been or are required to be replaced.In some cases, the remedy part for these recalled inflators was, or will be, an inflator using either propellant 2004 or 2004L that does contain a desiccant. None of these "desiccated" remedy parts (which were installed in older model year vehicles) are currently under recall for a degradation concern. Certain subsets of desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004 for use as original equipment, however, have been recalled for a degradation concern. All Takata inflators produced with propellant 2004L contain desiccant, and none of these desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L are under recall for a degradation concern. There have been no reported field ruptures in any non-recalled desiccated PSAN inflators.It is understood that desiccants fully saturate at some threshold, at which point any additional moisture will not be captured. This means the degradation process observed in non-desiccated inflators using propellant 2004 may also occur in non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004, assuming additional moisture enters the inflator and high temperature cycling occurs. Based on available information, desiccant saturation can occur within the first five years in the worst environments, and the time required for full saturation is affected by multiple factors. While no present safety risk has been identified, further work is needed to evaluate the future risk of non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004.Three entities -- Takata (now known as TK Global), the Independent Testing Coalition, and Exponent -- have been studying the long-term behavior of Takata desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004L (as well as 2004) in the presence of moisture and temperature cycling. The research efforts, which include development of predictive modeling techniques and field sample analysis, are ongoing. To date, none of the researchers have identified field evidence showing that propellant 2004L is undergoing a degradation process that leads to aggressive deployment and potential rupture. However, the time in service of such inflators remains short compared to that of the inflators using propellant 2004. Further study is needed to assess the long-term safety of desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L.The Office of Defects Investigation is opening this investigation to examine whether a safety defect related to propellant degradation exists in non-recalled desiccated PSAN frontal inflators manufactured by Takata. This investigation will require extensive information on Takata production processes and surveys of inflators in the field. Lists of recall actions that may have used desiccated PSAN inflators as remedy parts, as well as the makes and models originally manufactured with them, is available with the downloadable version of this document (see nhtsa.gov/recalls?nhtsaId=EA21002 -- note this information is subject to change/revision as the investigation proceeds). This investigation does not supersede EA15-001, which remains open.

• EAEA19004CLOSEDOpened 12/1/2019
  Steering loss due to linkage separation
  STEERING:LINKAGES:DRAG:LINK:CONNECTION

  On December 17, 2018, NHTSA's Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened Preliminary Evaluation PE18016 to investigate alleged drag link failures in the steering system on model year (MY) 2015 and 2016 Ram 2500 trucks manufactured by FCA US, LLC (FCA).  The drag link failures were found to be due to a safety defect with the steering linkage where the drag link adjustable connector (used to adjust the steering system), held in position by two opposing jam nuts, can loosen.   The loosening of this part can lead to wear and deterioration of the threads and eventual separation of the drag link, causing loss of steering.  During the course of PE18016, it was found that two styles of drag link were used by FCA on the subject vehicles.  The subject vehicles consist of two drivetrain types including four-wheel drive (4WD) and two-wheel drive (2WD).  The 4WD and 2WD trucks used drag links of differing design but both incorporated the same threaded connector.  In January 2019 FCA issued recall 19V-021 to address a potential loss of steering control in certain Model Year (MY) 2013-2018 4WD RAM 2500 and 3500 trucks.  The trucks using the 2WD style drag link were not included in the scope of recall 19V-021. ODI upgraded PE18016 to an Engineering Analysis EA19004 on December 12, 2019.  The purpose of EA19004 was to investigate if the root cause of the safety defect addressed by recall 19V-201 also affected the 2WD trucks and evaluate FCA’s rationale for not including them. ODI also monitored incoming consumer complaints regarding the remedy associated with 19V-021 and evaluated the suitability and long-term effectiveness of the prescribed repair. In the Defect Information Report submitted for recall 19V-021, FCA stated that the outboard jam nut could loosen and result in damage to the threading of the steering drag link connector.  This could cause a separation in the drag link resulting in a loss of steering control.  FCA determined that only the 4WD style drag link was affected and did not recall trucks with the 2WD style drag link due to design differences that made it unsusceptible to this failure mode.  The repair remedy called for the steering coupler to be tightened to the proper torque prior to the jam nut being spot welded to the coupler body. If the coupler has already become detached or correct torque cannot be obtained, the drag link is to be replaced with an updated unit that went into production on the MY2019 RAM trucks.This updated unit uses a clamp to secure the coupler in place of the jam nuts used on original style components. In order to determine if the 2WD drag link was susceptible to the same defect found on the 4WD vehicles, ODI requested that our Vehicle Research and Test Center (VRTC) conduct testing on both RAM 2500 4WD and 2WD trucks.  This testing was to determine operating conditions that might lead to loosened jam nuts of the recalled 4WD design and recreate these conditions on the 2WD vehicles to discover whether the 2WD design would also experience the loosening defect.  Results from VRTC’s dynamic testing indicated that when the jam nuts are significantly under-torqued, they may loosen further from regular vehicle operation on the 4WD vehicles.  Further, VRTC testing does not refute FCA’s assertion that the failure mechanism does not exist in the 2WD steering system. At the time of this closing resume, ODI has only received two allegations of drag link separation on 2WDvehicles.Neither could be validated as resulting from loose jam nuts. Since the release of recall 19V-021 ODI has received consumer complaints regarding the appearance of the spot weld applied to the defective drag link and the inability to have the steering properly aligned after welding of the jam nut.  In September 2023, FCA provided owners with a supplemental Vehicle Alignment Clarification notification that provided information on an updated alignment procedure. Regarding the spot weld remedy used on the 4WD vehicles, ODI is concerned about the remedy in that during an alignment by a non-dealer repair facility, the spot weld might not be replaced after the alignment.   To date there is no complaint trend of post alignment drag link separations, weld failures or other safety related incidents on remedied vehicles. This investigation is being closed with no further action. The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist. The Agency reserves the right to take additional action if warranted by future circumstances.

• EAEA19001RECALLOpened 4/19/2019
  Electrical overstress
  AIR BAGS: AIR BAG/RESTRAINT CONTROL MODULE

  The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened this investigation to determine if the failure of airbags to deploy during severe crashes, in certain vehicles, was the result of a safety related defect.  During the investigation a complex failure was studied that can result in non-deployment of subject vehicle air bags and other restraint system devices in severe crash events. The subject vehicles may be equipped with an airbag control unit (ACU) for the supplemental restraint system (SRS) Electronic Control Unit (ECU) manufactured by ZF-TRW.  The ECU receives signals from crash sensors mounted in the vehicle and deploys the vehicle air bags and seat belt pretensioners in accordance with manufacturer design specifications.  The ECU in the subject vehicles contains a model DS84 application-specific integrated circuit (ASIC) which controls the communication of the crash sensor signal, firing commands (i.e., when to deploy the airbag(s) and/or pretensioners), and fault information (e.g., diagnostic trouble codes). In September 2016, FCA announced recall 16V-668 for certain model year (MY) 2010 to 2014 Chrysler, Dodge and Jeep products manufactured with the subject ZF-TRW ACU.  In this recall, FCA discussed an EOS condition that resulted in a failure of the subject DS84 ASIC, which caused air bag non-deployment.  FCA noted that the defect condition had only been observed in vehicles equipped with sensor harnessing routed across the front of the vehicle.  Other FCA vehicles that also used the subject ACU, but were not equipped with cross-car harnessing, had not experienced EOS failures, despite similar time in service. During the course of this investigation, ODI sent two separate Information Request (IR) letters to six vehicle manufactures (including FCA, Hyundai, Honda, Kia, Mitsubishi, and Toyota) and one IR letter to ZF-TRW.  These IR letters resulted in ODI receiving comprehensive data from these manufacturers and suppliers. Studies of this data found that the DS84 ASIC does not have sufficient protection against negative electrical transients or electrical overstress (“EOS”) that can be generated in certain severe crashes.  An electrical transient occurs when the electrical power supplied to a circuit changes momentarily over a short duration of time.   In these severe crash cases, the crash sensors and other powered wiring can be damaged and short circuited so as to create a negative electrical transient of sufficient intensity and duration (that are outside the vehicle manufacturer's specification) to damage the ASIC before the restraint device deployment signal is received by the SRS ECU.  This damaged signal can lead to incomplete or nondeployment of the air bags and/or pretensioners.  Airbag non-deployment and/or lack of pretensioner operation can increase the risk or severity of injury in a crash.A total of 8 fatalities and 14 injuries were associated with known EOS events. The common element in all investigated manufacturers vehicles is the SRS ECU containing a DS84 ASIC manufactured by ZF-TRW.  The risk associated with the ASIC is equally shared among all OEMS involved in the investigation.  The actual real-world risk can be mitigated by other factors which were assessed by ODI during this investigation. The first mitigating factor involves protections built into the ACU design which protect the DS84 ASIC from damage.  There are multiple strategies and levels of protection employed by different OEMs that provide effective EOS mitigation.  The two most common strategies at the ACU level are circuit protection diodes on the remote senor signal lines, and current limiting resistors that protect critical components. The second mitigating factor is found at the vehicle level and involves the location and routing of the wires leading from the crash sensors to the SRS ECU.  If the wires are well protected in a crash and are not routed with other power wires carrying large currents, the risk for an EOS event is significantly reduced or eliminated. These design specific factors combine to produce a spectrum of risk for the vehicles equipped with ACUs using the DS84 ASIC.  Given the many of years of field exposure, it is possible to divide the subject population into two groups; vehicles which have experienced EOS events, and vehicles which have not experienced EOS field events. Four of the six OEMs involved in this investigation have experienced EOS field events on at least one of their models equipped with a DS84 ASIC.  All vehicle models (including the Toyota models identified in the Failure Report Summary of the opening resume for this investigation) with field events have been recalled.  In an abundance of caution, ODI kept this investigation open five years to monitor field performance and did not identify any field events on vehicles not included in existing safety recalls. Given the spectrum of risk identified in this investigation and that all vehicles with a demonstrated unreasonable risk have been recalled, ODI is closing this investigation. ODI is closing this investigation with the following manufacturer safety recalls: 16V-668, 18E-043, 18V-137, 18V-363, and 20V-024.  With the recall actions taken by the subject vehicle and equipment manufacturers, this investigation is closed. The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exists on other model or model year vehicles outside of the recall scopes. The agency reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.

• PEPE18016RECALLOpened 12/17/2018
  Steering loss due to linkage separation
  STEERING:LINKAGES:DRAG:LINK:CONNECTION

  On December 17, 2018, NHTSA's Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened Preliminary Evaluation (PE) 18-016 to investigate the steering system on model year (MY) 2015 and 2016 Ram 2500 manufactured by FCA US, LLC (FCA). Four complaints were received alleging separation of the drag link, a steering linkage that connects between the right front steering knuckle and the pitman arm on the steering box output shaft. The failures were found to be at a threaded coupler within the drag link used for adjusting the length of the linkage during routine maintenance (alignment) of the steering system.Once separation occurs, turning the steering wheel has no effect, and there is no way for the driver to control or maintain the direction of the vehicle. During the investigation, it was determined that the same threaded coupler was used on two different drag link designs FCA manufactured on MY 2013-2018 Ram 2500 and 3500 pickups. FCA refers to the designs as either 4x2 or 4x4 style. In both designs, the coupler is prevented from turning on the drag link via two jam nuts that are tightened against the coupler. In its response to NHTSA's March 15, 2019, Information Request (IR) letter, FCA identified 48 incidents alleging separation of the steering linkage at the coupler resulting in a loss of steering control. Of those, 13 involved a crash, one of which resulted in an injury. All of the separations involved the 4x4 style drag link. Additionally, FCA's IR response refers to over 300 4x4 style equipped vehicles that experienced, or may have experienced loosening of one or more coupler jam nuts. On January 25, 2019, FCA submitted a Defect Information Report (DIR) initiating NHTSA Recall No. 19V-021. In its DIR, FCA stated that the outboard jam nut in certain MY 2013-2018 Ram 2500 and 3500 could loosen potentially resulting in damage to the coupler and/or drag link threading allowing one end of the drag link to separate. The DIR notes that drag link separation results in loss of steering control, which in turn can cause a crash without warning. FCA's DIR did not identify a root cause for the defect, however it posits that an improperly torqued outboard jam nut could loosen, and with long-term vehicle use, cause damage to the outer link bar and/or coupler threads due to relative motion between the two components. The scope of Recall 19V-021 included vehicles with the 4x4 style drag link only. Also discussed in its IR response, FCA noted that the 4x2 style drag link contains a design difference (the outboard portion of the drag link is straight while the 4x4 style contains a bend) which it suggests may result in differences in the mechanical (bending) loads presented at the coupler and jam nut interface. Moreover, the DIR states that While root cause of the 4x4 style defect has not been established, FCA US believes that bending loads on the drag link is, at least, a causal contributing factor. FCA notes it did not identify any reports alleging 4x2 style separation as well as only three reports of loosening of jam nuts, two of which resulted in loosening that provided obvious warning to the vehicle operator, indicating a different failure mode.NHTSA is upgrading this investigation to Engineering Analysis (EA) 19-004 in order to continue to monitor the subject 4x2 style vehicles for evidence of field failures. Additionally, in conjunction with NHTSA's Vehicle Research and Test Center, ODI intends to more thoroughly study potential root cause(s) of the 4x4 style defect mechanism, and if identified, will seek to determine if the 4x2 drag link is susceptible to the same mechanism(s). NHTSA will also evaluate the long-term suitability of the recall

• RQRQ15004RECALLOpened 7/24/2015
  Software security vulnerability
  ELECTRICAL SYSTEM:SOFTWARE

  On July 23, 2015, Fiat Chrysler Automobiles (FCA) launched Safety Recall 15V-461 to remedy security vulnerabilities in approximately 1.4 million model year (MY) 2013 through 2015 vehicles equipped with Uconnect head units (HU) 8.4A (RA3 radio) and 8.4AN (RA4 radio) manufactured by Harman International.On July 24, 2015, the Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened Recall Query, RQ 15-004, to investigate HU security vulnerabilities and remedy effectiveness in the recalled population and to determine whether similar units have been supplied for use in other FCA vehicles.In an August 11, 2015 letter, FCA submitted a second Part 573 safety recall report expanding the scope of the Uconnect RA4 model radio to include additional 7,810 MY 2015 Jeep Renegade vehicles manufactured from September 18, 2014 through June 25, 2015 (Recall 15V-508).Scope analysis indicated that Uconnect radios installed in FCA vehicles not included in recalls 15V-461 or 15V-508 (subject recalls) are not equipped with built-in cellular access or short range wireless communication features and, thus, do not contain the security vulnerabilities addressed by the subject recalls. SUBJECT VEHICLES: MY2014 through 2015 Dodge Durango, Jeep Grand Cherokee and Jeep Cherokee sport utility vehicles; MY2013 through 2015 Ram 1500, 2500, 3500 and 4500/5500 pickup trucks; MY2013 through 2015 Dodge Viper vehicles; and MY2015 Chrysler 200, 300, Jeep Renegade, Dodge Charger and Challenger vehicles.According to FCA, long and short range wireless vulnerabilities identified in the recalled vehicles could allow unauthorized third-party access to, and manipulation of, networked vehicle control systems.Successful exploitation of the vulnerabilities, coupled with reverse engineering of networked microprocessor control modules, could result in unauthorized manipulation of vehicle control systems. This unauthorized manipulation of vehicle controls and systems could expose the driver, vehicle occupants or other highway users to an increased risk of injury.FCA and its network provider, Sprint, conducted a nationwide campaign to block access to a radio communications port that was unintentionally left open.On July 27, 2015, short range wireless vulnerabilities were also blocked.Finally, third party security evaluation and regression testing identified vulnerabilities that were either remedied by Sprint or through updates to the FCA Uconnect software.ODI identified a total of 30 complaints or field reports on unique vehicles submitted by FCA (29) or received by NHTSA (1) alleging incidents of theft from a vehicle or anomalous performance that the owner alleged were caused by, or may have been caused by, remote hacking.Twenty-six (87%) of these reports were submitted after a magazine article was published on July 21, 2015, describing the remote hacking of an FCA vehicle by researchers who were able to affect the operation of various vehicle control systems, including the service brakes, steering, throttle and ignition.Most of the complaints involved vehicle systems that were not safety critical (e.g., complaints related to radio, navigation system, or air-conditioning control) and did not affect vehicle control.Three complaints reported engine stalls.One owner reported sudden unintended acceleration allegedly related to hacking.None of the complaints or field reports reviewed involved the steering and braking vehicle control effects demonstrated by the research hackers prior to the recall.There were no confirmed incidents of hacking in any of the records reviewed by ODI.The remedies completed by Sprint and FCA appear to have eliminated vulnerabilities that mi

• AQAQ14003CLOSEDOpened 10/20/2014
  Chrysler's execution of 13V-528 & 529
  STEERING:LINKAGES:TIE ROD ASSEMBLY

  RMD opened this audit query (AQ) investigation in order to better understand and evaluate Chrysler's process(es) for timely and efficient execution of its safety recall campaigns, including its oversight and management of its parts division Mopar.Prior to opening this investigation, RMD had raised concerns with the company related to its execution of two safety recalls, 13V-528 and 13V-529, both of which involved safety defects that could cause the involved vehicles, FCA?s heavier Dodge Ram trucks, to lose steering control suddenly and without warning.Specifically, RMD inquired about the availability of parts for recall repairs, by email and phone on January 15, 2014 and February 19, 2014, due to the volume of complaints it was receiving from owners alleging parts scarcity and parts restrictions. FCA steadfastly denied it had placed parts restrictions on its dealers to manage issues of parts scarcity.FCA shared material showing it had uncommitted stock of parts available for its dealers. Nevertheless, consumer complaints of lack of parts continued.RMD made independent inquiries tosome dealers tobetter understand the conflicting claims between owners alleging lack of ability to repair their defective vehicles due to lack of parts, and FCA?s information showing availability of parts.Dealers informed and provided documentation to RMD on February 21, 2014 and February 25, 2014 showing FCA had, in fact, put into place parts restrictions and, further, had in some instances canceled dealerships? back orders for parts.In addition, during the course of its dialogue with dealers, RMD discovered that FCA had notified their dealerships on February 27, 2014 to return the recall remedy parts over quality concerns, and had therefore effectively canceled its safety recall program without notification to NHTSA. RMD issued a request for information (IR) on October 21, 2014.The company failed to respond to a number of the questions RMD asked that required it to produce specifics surrounding the repairs and parts ordering process with the recalls, including a question about whether a dealer order for recall parts could be canceled and under what circumstances.

• DPDP14004CLOSEDOpened 9/25/2014
  Totally Integrated Power Module Failure
  ELECTRICAL SYSTEM

  In a letter dated August 21, 2014, the Center for Auto Safety (CAS) petitioned the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) to initiate a defect investigation of alleged failures associated with the Totally Integrated Power Module (TIPM) installed in Chrysler SUV?s, trucks, and vans beginning in the 2007 model year. The petitioner alleges that TIPM defects may result in engine stall, airbag non-deployment, failure of fuel pump shutoff resulting in unintended acceleration, fire, and other symptoms. On September 25, 2014, the Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened DP14-004 to evaluate the petition for a grant or deny decision. ODI analyzed complaint data provided by CAS as well as complaints submitted to ODI from consumers. In total, there were 296 complaints submitted by the petitioner in the original petition and five supplements, including 271 complaints related to the subject vehicles equipped with TIPM-7. Approximately 3 percent of CAS complaints are related to vehicles equipped with TIPM-6 and ODI?s review of these complaints did not identify any safety defect trends. ODI conducted a detailed review of complaints narratives submitted by CAS and consumers including careful analysis of vehicle repair histories, warranty claims obtained from the manufacturer and any available Customer Assistance Inquiry reports (CAIR). Analysis of the field data indicated that MY2011-2013 Jeep Grand Cherokee and Dodge Durango vehicles exhibited significantly higher complaint rates related to fuel pump relay (FPR) failures than other subject vehicles. In a September 3, 2014 letter to NHTSA, Chrysler submitted a Defect Information Report (DIR) identifying a defect in the FPR within the TIPM-7 which can result in a no start or stall condition in approximately 188,723 model year (MY) 2011 Jeep Grand Cherokee (WK) and Dodge Durango (WD) vehicles manufactured from January 5, 2010 through July 20, 2011 (14V-530).In a February 24, 2015 letter, Chrysler submitted a second DIR expanding the scope of the FPR defect condition to include an additional 338,216 MY 2012 through 2013 Jeep Grand Cherokee vehicles manufactured from September 17, 2010 through August 19, 2013 and MY 2012 through 2013 Dodge Durango vehicles manufactured from January 18, 2011 through August 19, 2013 (15V-115).ODI analysis of the CAS allegations of TIPM defects resulting in stall while driving, airbag non-deployment, unintended acceleration, fire and other faults identified a single defect condition related to 1 of over 60 different circuits in the TIPM assembly. The most common effect of this defect condition, related to the fuel pump relay, was a no-start concern, but it could also result in stall while driving (76 complaints). No valid evidence was presented in support of claims related to airbag non-deployment, unintended acceleration or fire resulting from TIPM faults and these claims were found to be wholly without merit based on review of the field data and design of the relevant systems and components.Except insofar as the petitioner's contentions relate to the defect condition addressed by the Chrysler recalls, the factual bases of the petitioner's contentions that any further investigation is necessary are unsupported. In our view, additional investigation is unlikely to result in a finding that a defect related to motor vehicle safety exists or a NHTSA order for the notification and remedy of a safety-related defect as alleged by the petitioner at the conclusion of the requested investigation. Therefore, in view of the need to allocate and prioritize NHTSA's limited resources to best accomplish the agency's safety mission, the petition is den

• PEPE11009RECALLOpened 4/4/2011
  Outer Tie Rod Failure
  STEERING:LINKAGES:TIE ROD ASSEMBLY

  ODI received complaints regarding failing tie rod ball studs on Model Year 2008-2011 Dodge Ram 2500 and 3500 vehicles resulting in loss of steering control.Chrysler concluded that misalignment of the left (driver side) ball stud on vehicles built with the Cross Car steering linkage system could allow contact between the bull stud and the ball housing which could weaken the stud and result in fracture.Chrysler submitted a recall notice on August 15, 2011 involving certain MY 2003-2011 Ram 2500 and Ram 3500 pickup trucks built or repaired with the Cross Car steering linkage.Chrysler will inspect, repair or realign the front end of the subject vehicles as needed.Chrysler's announcement of a safety recall on this matter addresses ODI's concerns.The ODI reports cited above can be reviewed at www-odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/owners/SearchNHTSAID under the following identification (ODI) numbers:10332525, 10357937, 10366591, 10303744, 10377166, 10373240, 10343969, 10375403, 10324831, 10373546, 10370771.