I hate to break it to you guys, but you're all wrong. The death flash actual has nothing to do with the plenum leak issue. They are completely separate. I've posted this before, but here it is again.

A careful read of the Chrysler TSB's shows that there are actual multiple TSB's for pinging issues, each with different symptoms and fixes. There is a separate and specific TSB for the plenum leak, which deals with what Chrysler calls "heavy spark knock" and "excessive oil consumption". If you go into any dealership complaining of bad pinging AND oil usage, they are going to recommend replacing your plenum per that specific TSB, not give you the death flash to cover it up.

The death flash has to do with a separate issue Chrsyler calls "light spark knock under warm conditions" and "under load". They go into good detail describing the conditions that produce this particular ping. It is caused by a timing issue, and it has its own TSB's (depending on year). The death flash was specifically engineered to correct this problem, and this problem only, and its exact use is detailed in the TSB. It corrects the timing advance, so that under warm conditions and load conditions, there is less chance of pinging. This problem existed on trucks right off the factory floor. This is the reason that some trucks in the latter production came out from the factory with the flash already (not to preemptively flash you in case you might get a plenum leak 10 years later). The flash was NOT designed to try to cover up a plenum leak. When you leak oil, you leak oil, and no flash is going to cover that up.

So as you see, these are different symptoms, different fixes, separate TSB's. Yes, both have to do with pinging, but the death flash did not come about because of the plenum problem.

Now that said, I'm sure there are poeple who were given the death flash when their problem was actually the plenum, or vise versa. However, this has more to do with poor troubleshooting and root cause analysis by the mechanics at the dealerships than anything else. Definitely not because the flash was intended for the plenum leak issue.

 

Wow, thanks for all the information! So would you say that it is good to leave the software flash intact then?

 

You might want to copy and paste that into a sticky.

 

Depends. If you are adverse to modifying your truck, and want to keep it mostly stock, then yes, you probably should keep the flash. If not, then there are much better ways (in my opinion) to cure the pinging issue that the flash was made for other then retarding timing. First, get a good PCM tune (SCT or B&G) that will boost engine performance and work with mods you have. This is probably the most important one. Second, cool the engine down some (i.e. 180 t-stat, 3923 plugs). Third, improve your ignition with a coil upgrade and/or higher quality cap/rotor and wires. Fourth, use higher octane fuel or octane booster. Lastly, keep your engine in good tune-up at all times. All of these things will help contribute to preventing pinging, and your truck will run better and have more power then if you leave it stock with the death flash in place.

If I get a chance, I may write it up and link to the specific TSB's I'm referring to. Its all in there.

 

Not saying that you're wrong, but since there have been lots of people that have claimed the DF was used to fix pinging due to the plenum leak, and a single person claims otherwise (even though your suggestion makes sense), could you provide the TSB #'s to backup your findings?

 

No problem, here you go.

The TSB for the plenum leak is 09-05-00.
http://dodgeram.info/tsb/2000/09-05-00.htm
This TSB clearly documents symptoms as being heavy spark knock and/or oil consumption. Notice the thorough description of the diagnostics that goes into verifying if a vacuum leak is present due to a failed plenum gasket. Also note that the only fix recommended is the repair of the plenum. Nowhere in this TSB will you find any reference to using an Authorized Software Update (aka the death flash) to fix the plenum issue.


Deathflash Example #1:
http://dodgeram.info/tsb/2002/18-004-02.htm
TSB 18-004-02 is for light to moderate spark knock. This is similar sympotms as the plenum, but they are clear to make the distiction that it is light to moderate, whereas the plenum, is heavy spark knock. Also there is no reference to oil consumption or vacuum leaks. The fix in this TSB is the Authorized Software Update. Read the "Diagnosis" section. It specifically states that this TSB will not compensate for heavy spark knock, and directs the mechanic to see TSB 09-05-00 (the Plenum Gasket TSB) if that is the case.


Deathflash Example #2:
http://dodgeram.info/tsb/2003/18-006-03.htm
TSB 18-006-03 is for light to moderate spark knock under acceleration. The fix for this TSB is the Authorized Software Update again. Notice again that it states the ONLY symptom is light to moderate spark knock. Nothing else (i.e. heavy knock and/or oil leackage as described in the plenum TSB).


Deathflash Example #3:
http://dodgeram.info/tsb/1998/18-24-98.htm
TSB 18-24-98 is another example of light spark knock under warm or load condition. The fix once again is the Authorized Software Update. Nothing to do with the plenum, oil leaks, heavy knock, or vacuum leaks.


So as you can see, the TSB for the plenum leak does not call out anything to do with updating the software. And the ones that do call out a software update specifically point to different (though similar) symptoms (i.e. light to moderate spark knock when warm and under load for the TSB's with the software update versus heavy spark knock and oil consumption for the TSB for the plenum). As I said, different symptoms, different fixes, separate TSB's. The death flash was not created for the plenum fix!!!.

Have dealerships applied it incorrectly when the problem was actually a plenum leak? Sure, probably more times then we would like to know about. But you have to make a distinction between Chrysler and dealerships to understand why this happens. They are not the same. Chrylser is the engineering house and the authority on these matters. They are the ones who write the TSB's and engineer the flashes. They are the ones that know exactly what the issues are and how to fix them. Lots of enginering time goes into the anaylsis and resolution of the issues before they ever release a TSB. The dealerships on the other hand have no say into any of this, they are basically just garages that just happen to have a license to deal Chrysler products. It is up to them to simply apply the TSB that are handed down from them. So there is very easy chances that they will mis-apply the TSB's though poor/rushed/incomplete diagnosis of the problem, or from simply just not knowing the difference that exist between the TSB's for problems that are similar. Or they might even be just ripping you off, who knows. The point is, this is why it is on us as owners to understand what Chrysler engineers have documented so that we can diagnose for ourselves and so that we ensure that the dealership is doing the right repair.

Hope this helps.

 

^^^ Now that's some good solid info. I applaud you for doing your research and providing us with your findings. I vote that the above post be moved to a stickied FAQ.

 

I created a thread in the FAQ section, with full credit going to you. Nice job Silver.

 

Thanks Jason for putting that in the FAQ. That saved me some time for sure. I appreciate it.

 

some how much power is actual lost meaning number wise