07-08 Ram CTD Turbo / Emissions Problems

[RallyeMike]

Anyone else on this board enjoying the result of this?:

TSB No.:11-001-08   NHTSA No.:10025162   TSB Date:May 21, 2008   Date Added to File:July 15, 2008
Failing Component:
Engine And Engine Cooling:Engine
Summary:
Turbocharger cleaning procedure due to excessive soot accumulation for 2007-2008 (dh/d1) ram truck (2500/3500).

Apparently 07+ Ram CTD owners are the test bed for the new 2010 emissions requirements. Only 12k miles an it looks like I'm going to get bent over by Chrysler again.

[Ghoste]

I don't think it's just a issue for Dodge owners.  This is only anecdotal evidence but my father recently unloaded a nearly new F-150 for the same problem.  The dealership where he goes alluded to it being a pretty common problem so he unloaded it for one of the V-10 Furds.

[firefighter3931]

Mike, a buddy of mine is the lead diesel tech at one of the local dealerships. He says that this is an ongoing issue with the new 6.7's....you are not alone.  

I have an 05 Dually with the 600 series 5.9 CTD....luv it !  



Ron

[RallyeMike]

Ron,

It appears Chrysler's current "answer" is to alternately clean and replace your turbo until the warranty runs out, and then you get (bleep)ed.

Update - just found below ...., any chance your bud can verify this?


The good news is that Cummings has finally come up with a fix that seems to work. The P2262 dtc is caused by the turbocharger actuator not sliding properly and causing a lack of boost due to soot build up. What we have been doing is:

1.   Installing a cleaning port into the turbocharger housing and using a water based cleaner to clean the turbo.
2.   Remove the egr valve, crossover tube, and egr cooler and clean to a like new condition.
3.   Update the engine control module , and instrument cluster to latest software versions.

There is also an elimination kit, but results don't seem to be in yet. The truck probably would not pass the local EPA smell test either....

[Red Ram]

Call the State Lemon Law program! It might get resolved before it even has to go to arbitration.

[RallyeMike]

Where I live, it has to be repaired 4 times for the same thing first, and all within 2 years. Since a year has already gone by, I'm not likely to hit that target.

[Red Ram]

You need four repairs for the same thing (nonconformity)...only one of those repairs needs to be done within 2 years and 24,000 miles. The paperwork must be submitted within 30 months of original delivery and the car must have been originally purchased in Washington State (you're from Washington right?). You can also qualify if the car was in the shop for 30 days or more...15 of those within 2yr/24,000miles.

[oldgold69]

a guy that works with my son  had his 08 ctd turned in under the lemon law.  got only 9 mpg. plus the converter plugged. got a new 09.  a mack  mechanic i know says they have the same problem with 08 macks.  road trucks run long enough to keep the converter clean. but city trucks when the converter gets plugged alight comes on to tell you to pull over. then you put the truck in rejuvenate. the engine revs to1800 runs for about ten minutes this way till clean.  if they  dont pull over the converter plugs. and the service light comes on so you have to go to the dealer to clear it.  to fix a plugged converter cost  up to 5 grand

[RallyeMike]

You need four repairs for the same thing (nonconformity)...only one of those repairs needs to be done within 2 years and 24,000 miles. The paperwork must be submitted within 30 months of original delivery and the car must have been originally purchased in Washington State (you're from Washington right?). You can also qualify if the car was in the shop for 30 days or more...15 of those within 2yr/24,000miles.

Thanks for the clarification. I guess the only clock I'm running against then is the lifespan of Chrysler.

[Red Ram]

I'd suggest calling Lemon Law on Wednesday and ask for Brad.

[RallyeMike]

To clarify, I've never had a problem with the particulate filter plugging up. This failure is due to the new emissions system of recirculating the exhaust back through the turbo for a 2nd burn. The EGR and turbo were all gummed up with soot.  The dealer performed 4 TSB's to correct the problem(s). When I asked for copies of the TSB's, as recommended by the Lemon Law professionals, the Dealer flat refused to provide them. They told me to Google for info. rotz:

Red Ram: I'm reading up on RCW 19.118 and I'll be calling Brad on Wednesday for advice. Thanks for the tip.

[Silver R/T]

should've went with 5.9L, I did and I like it

[RallyeMike]

Well golly, that's a really big help at this point 

Here, let me thank you   

[TK73]

Well golly, that's a really big help at this point 

Here, let me thank you   

[oldgold69]

any time you try to reburn exhaust gases all it does is gum up the turbo and the engine. soots the oil to where it has to be changed more often  thats why my kid bought the 06 ctd

[firefighter3931]

This failure is due to the new emissions system of recirculating the exhaust back through the turbo for a 2nd burn. The EGR and turbo were all gummed up with soot. 

Man, what a pi$$ poor design that is !  I've heard of the DPF's clogging up but fubarring a turbo in the name of emissions is plain stupid !  Freakin EPA > 

The dealer performed 4 TSB's to correct the problem(s). When I asked for copies of the TSB's, as recommended by the Lemon Law professionals, the Dealer flat refused to provide them. They told me to Google for info. rotz:

What the hell is up with that ? Geez, you would think with the Industry in a state of Crisis that they would be more co-operative. 


Mike, keep us up to speed on your progress. Make them fix it ! 




Ron

[hemigeno]

My '07/6.7L 3500MC now has over 27k on the clock.  I had one problem within the first thousand miles with the cat getting plugged up, but that was due to a tank of mis-labeled diesel fuel (99.99% sure the Mobil station in Zanesville, OH put low sulphur fuel in a tank/pump labeled for ULSD).  The truck eventually digested that OK, but it took nearly the whole way back from Carlisle, PA to St. Louis, MO for it to clear its throat and start running right.  Both my hometown dealer and a diesel tech from near Carlisle that I spoke with said the problem was pretty common, and that the emissions system "fixes itself" at highway speeds as long as it has a good supply of ULSD.  They did have a software patch for the computer that allows the truck to reset the "Dealer Service Required" reminder on the overhead console display if the problem goes away on its own - as happened with the 800 mile return trip from PA.  That's all they did to the truck when I brought it in for service after the trip to Carlisle (in '07) - didn't have to purge the cat/exhaust system.

I had not heard about the potential problem with the Turbo before, but I'm getting an education on the situation firsthand.  Within the last 4-5 weeks, the "check engine" light started coming on.  I didn't have time to head on down to the dealership right away, so I let it go for a few days.  When I did call up to make an appointment, they said it would be a week before they could get me in.  I quizzed them about whether continuing to drive the truck would be a problem, and they said that it was likely the aforementioned problem with the Turbo getting fouled out - and that it wouldn't hurt the truck to drive for at least a little while in that condition. 

Sooo, I continued driving it for a few days waiting for my service appointment date.  I had a few jobsite visits to make during that time, and some of them were in the hilly part of Jefferson County.  Just for grins, I had turned on the Jake (engine) brake while cruising around.  Lo and behold, the check engine light ends up going out the day before my appointment.  I called to cancel the appointment, as I had a bunch of work stuff dumped on me that would have made losing my truck for the day a real pain.  The very cool/helpful Service Advisor (of the three they have at that particular dealership) asked me if I had been running the Jake Brake.  At the time, I had not made the connection between running the Jake and my check engine light turning off.  He said to ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS turn the Jake Brake on.  Somehow, that ends up keeping the turbo cleaned out enough to prevent it from gumming up.  He also recommended against letting the truck idle for any length of time, which I normally don't do much of anyway.

After that, I started making it a habit to turn on the Jake every time I start the truck up.  The light stayed off for a couple days, including a 400 mile road trip my daughter and I made to check out a college in SW Missouri.  Weirdly enough, it came back on the day following the trip.  I didn't panic though, and just kept driving it around.  The light stayed on for 3-4 days, then went back off.  After a few days off, it came back on for 2 days or so - and then went off again.  It was on this past weekend for my 1000-mile trip to Michigan, but was off again come Sunday morning when I drove the family to church.  It's been off ever since.  The pattern seems to be getting longer between episodes when the light is on.

I think what's happening is the repeated use of the Jake is slowly cleaning the crud out of the Turbo.  As I continue to put miles on it, I think it should keep from being a problem.  According to the dealership, it does no harm to the truck to run the Jake constantly - and they say it saves on brake pad/rotor wear anyway (maybe a slight amount).  I actually think running on the interstate with the cruise control on doesn't help the Turbo much.  Over the weekend, I noticed that every time I took the cruise off or had the engine decelerate for whatever reason, a pretty good puff of smoke came out the tailpipe.  These fancy emissions systems do seem to burn cleaner (especially when brand-spanking-new), but they also seem to store up a certain amount of crud in the system that gets discharged periodically.  Guess as long as it doesn't get discharged while it's on the sniffer, no big deal...   

That being said, I might be trading this truck in on a restyled 2010 3500 when those are introduced in a couple years.

[RallyeMike]

Geno:

Do a Google search on 07 Ram EGR / Turbo problems, and then check out the diesel forums and read, read, read. It will be an eye-opener.

What the hell is up with that ? Geez, you would think with the Industry in a state of Crisis that they would be more co-operative.  Tongue

Cooperative?! These problems have been, and are very well known by Chrysler.  The dealers continue to sell them without a wary word to any customer who does not know of the problems, and they will continue to do so.

[hemigeno]

Per your suggestion, I did take some time to read up on several of the sites (a small fraction of what's out there, I'm sure).  My 2007.5 truck was ordered in March/April of 2007, so I suppose I was one of the guinea pigs.  All the info on problems was not available at the time I ordered or picked my truck up, although they were marketing the heck out of that 6.7L at the time.

Am I going to put my truck up for sale right now?  No way.  It's actually performed way better than you'd think after reading some of the vitreolic stuff that's out there.  You'd think there would be guys with pitchforks and torches making an assault on Chrysler's Auburn Hills HQ, or burning their trucks on the dealership's lot from what some guys are saying.

Knock on wood, but my Check Engine Light problem seems to be waning, and my earlier problem with the catalyst plugging up was isolated.  I'm happy, and there are undoubtedly other guys out there who've had good experience with their 6.7s also.

I did read about a rumored switch away from the EGR & Bluetec exhaust to another completely different type of emissions system for 2010.  If they go that route AND redesign the 3500 bodystyle, I might think about trading this one in - but I won't be badmouthing it unless things get a whole lot worse than they are right now.

[BlackStig68]

I've worked on plenty of these trucks and have dealt with anything from; Turbo replacement at 6kmiles to having the light not come on until almost 100k miles. Keep in mind there are factors to consider. Typically, I see most diesels sooting up early who belong to people who buy diesels for "light" driving or used as a family truck. What does this mean? Lots of city driving, idling (oftenly for hours or overnighters), not allowing the vehicle to enter into Regeneration mode, etc. On the flip side I've done first cleanings for a guys who's lasted almost 100k without an issue in the emissions system. The big difference is driving style. Minimal idle times and distance drives.

I sympathize with you guys who have to deal with the problems. A lot of this has to do with the 2010 emissions standards. So not only will Dodge face issues, so will Chevy and Ford. Keep in mind this standard forces 90% improvement in emissions over the 5.9L which will be phased out. EPA EPA EPA... 

Will this ever go away? Probably not, if you know how much pollution a diesel puts out you'll realize that. However, I see it improving as the turbocharger design gets better. This will be a service item, thus the reason the cleaning port is added (and why the new turbos have the ports built in from the factory).

If you ever see one torn down for cleaning you'll be amazed at how much soot accumulation takes place in the system. Especially in the EGR valve and cooler.

My advice is to drive them hard and use diesels for what they were built for. The EPA standards are only harsher and they'll be hitting the big rig industry with extremely strict standards in the next few years.

[RallyeMike]

My advice is to drive them hard and use diesels for what they were built for. The EPA standards are only harsher and they'll be hitting the big rig industry with extremely strict standards in the next few years.

Yea, I've heard the "drive it harder" angle many times, and it's just..... plain..... CRAP. It's Chrysler's way have shucking some of the blame for poor design. The rest of the blame is placed on the EPA.

Chrysler has not, and still is not, marketing the 6.7 as a "work mostly "/ "tow mostly" / "got to drive it hard or it goes tits-up in 6,000 miles" truck. I bet 95 % of the people who buy these (historically and today) tow or haul a very small percentage of the time. People are sold on, and want, a multi-purpose vehicle that gets good mileage, is reliable, and has towing power, and they are willing to pay the premium cost for a diesel truck to do this. Don't you think Chrysler knows this? How many studies do you think Chrysler does to target their vehicles to consumer need? They know damn-well how most all of the buyers of their diesel trucks drive them and they have failed to engineer or truthfully market the trucks to meet these needs.

I bought my truck to tow my race car 1600 miles to Nevada and back across several mountain ranges, several times a year in the summer. The rest of the year it needs to get me where I need to go and do minor work projects. If it cannot reliably serve both functions then Chrysler should market it as such. The "drive it harder" directive is back-peddling bullshit. I feel for the auto industry because they are struggling to meet very restrictive EPA requirements, but if they can't do it they should'nt be settling on passing the problem onto the consumer. Not only is it unethical, it's just plain stupid. In the long run, Chrysler is just cutting their own throat.

Rant over   

[BlackStig68]

I agree with you as far as marketing goes. They'll load up a lot of trucks with high luxury items and show them off as monster trucks for the city. You could pull it off with the 5.9s but not with the 6.7s. I'd never see a use for a big diesel truck unless i would be using it purposely,imho, the reason I ride a regular 1500. But I guess people will do anything to make a sale.

As far as thinking that driving them longer and harder doesn't effect the system I'd prolly see it differently but I can only speak through my experience working on them. The majority of the ones that come in for the emissions related repairs seem to be the ones with higher idle times and softer driving habbits (i.e. never letting the vehicle into regen) rather than guys who load up their trucks and use them for work. I guess if you compare what a 6.7 has to do compared to a 5.9 as far as emissions go you can get an idea of how signifigant the change is. But like I said earlier, you can find Ford and GM running into similar problems as well. If its strictly a blame on poor design then every brand out there that currently meets the 2010 standard is in the same boat... In any case I hope they resolve your problems and get you back on the road without the light coming on. Good Luck.

[hemigeno]

I also fall into that "mixed driving" group, as I do use my '07 as a DD.  My house is only 5 miles from my shop, and most days the truck is only driven that round trip.  Once a week or so, I have to make 100-150mile round trips, and once a month or so I'll take a 1,000mile+ trip.  Most of that driving is without a heavy load, but I want, and (no matter what) will purchase, a truck that is capable of pulling a 10-15,000lb. trailer with no sweat.  This '07 does the trick, and so far it has held up respectably well.

BlackStig, what is it that kicks these trucks into regeneration mode?  Just some high-speed interstate driving?  Will keeping the cruise control on while driving keep the truck from slipping into regen mode?

Inquiring minds want to know...

[RallyeMike]

Geno: Read your owners manual on the regen. When the DPF hits 80% full, it messages you and you are supposed to drive at freeway speeds for something like 45 minutes. The DPF is cleaned by extra fuel that is injected into the system to burn the particulate matter. This however, does absolutely nothing to clear up a sooted EGR or turbo.

If its strictly a blame on poor design then every brand out there that currently meets the 2010 standard is in the same boat. In any case I hope they resolve your problems and get you back on the road without the light coming on. Good Luck.

.

Other than this problem, it's a fantastic truck, so that is my hope too.