2012 Dodge Ram HEMI, Brand New, 2,000miles, Engine Knock - UPDATE!
Veteran
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 370
Likes: 0
Don't like what the service department tells you?
Talk to the owner who is the service guy's father.
Site Moderator-Dodge Tech
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 3,724
Likes: 22
From: Nashville, Tennessee
Message to whom it may concern:
If you measure the journal I bet there will be some variance (out-of-round) Any significant length of time ran with knock caused by a rod will do that.
Crankshaft Journal
TWO / 10,0000ths of an inch. I could do that with a plastic hammer! Just put a dang short block in it and be done. Get the damn truck out of the shop and back on the road. Stop trying to be efficient. You're wasting the tech's time, the customer's time and occupying a stall in the shop that should be making money instead of growing f%$&ing grass in it.
Have a nice day
If you measure the journal I bet there will be some variance (out-of-round) Any significant length of time ran with knock caused by a rod will do that.
Crankshaft Journal
The maximum allowable taper is 0.008mm (0.0004 inch.) and maximum out of round is 0.005mm (0.0002 inch).
Have a nice day
Last edited by TNtech; Dec 16, 2012 at 12:30 PM.
Registered User
Joined: Dec 2012
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Having the some trouble with my 2012 Ram 1500!
So, if anyone remembers, I had a thread on here about my Brand New, 1 month old Dodge Ram HEMI knocking, constantly, even after warmed up. I had the thread removed because of legal reasons, and have since got Chrysler Canada to look into the issue. Here's the noise:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=noN4_4D2hHA
Since I received the truck, it has been in the shop 37 days out of the 119. 3 weeks ago it had the engine torn down. They inspected, and machine shop measured piston # 1, and determined that it's not within specifications size wise. Meaning it's too small for the cylinder bore, and too small according to Chrysler Canada.
They also found score marks on the crank journals of the journal holding piston rod's 1 and 3. Here's a picture of the journal, and the rod # 3 (it's hard to see the score marks, as not focused)
Here's their solution, which, IMO, is ridiculous to do on a brand new truck, less then 2 months old with 2,000 miles on it
-Replace piston # 1 (currently back ordered)
-Replace crank bearing #1 and #3 (currently back ordered)
-Decided NOT to rebalance rotating assembly, even tho piston # 1 will be different weight
-Decided not to hone the cylinder walls for new piston
-Do nothing about the score marks on the journal, and leave the score marks on the bottom of rod # 3
-Hope that fixes knock, and if it doesn't, continue by ripping engine apart again, and moving on to next cylinder, and repeat.
Thoughts? IMO, a new factory engine should have been put in when they found the score marks, and incorrect piston size, at the very least, a new short block. Although... maybe this is the correct way to rebuild an engine but I don't think so.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=noN4_4D2hHA
Since I received the truck, it has been in the shop 37 days out of the 119. 3 weeks ago it had the engine torn down. They inspected, and machine shop measured piston # 1, and determined that it's not within specifications size wise. Meaning it's too small for the cylinder bore, and too small according to Chrysler Canada.
They also found score marks on the crank journals of the journal holding piston rod's 1 and 3. Here's a picture of the journal, and the rod # 3 (it's hard to see the score marks, as not focused)
Here's their solution, which, IMO, is ridiculous to do on a brand new truck, less then 2 months old with 2,000 miles on it
-Replace piston # 1 (currently back ordered)
-Replace crank bearing #1 and #3 (currently back ordered)
-Decided NOT to rebalance rotating assembly, even tho piston # 1 will be different weight
-Decided not to hone the cylinder walls for new piston
-Do nothing about the score marks on the journal, and leave the score marks on the bottom of rod # 3
-Hope that fixes knock, and if it doesn't, continue by ripping engine apart again, and moving on to next cylinder, and repeat.
Thoughts? IMO, a new factory engine should have been put in when they found the score marks, and incorrect piston size, at the very least, a new short block. Although... maybe this is the correct way to rebuild an engine but I don't think so.
Thread Starter
|
Professional
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 128
Likes: 1
Dodge? You mean DodgeCAcares? (Katie?). I sent her a PM with the details, havn't heard back.
I have a contact at Chrysler Canada, but getting him to allow a short block replacement isn't working.
I think the problem here is the engineering department. They seem to be making the decisions, and are deciding that rebuilding is a better solution then a shortblock.
I have a contact at Chrysler Canada, but getting him to allow a short block replacement isn't working.
I think the problem here is the engineering department. They seem to be making the decisions, and are deciding that rebuilding is a better solution then a shortblock.
Captain
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 507
Likes: 9
Dodge? You mean DodgeCAcares? (Katie?). I sent her a PM with the details, havn't heard back.
I have a contact at Chrysler Canada, but getting him to allow a short block replacement isn't working.
I think the problem here is the engineering department. They seem to be making the decisions, and are deciding that rebuilding is a better solution then a shortblock.
I have a contact at Chrysler Canada, but getting him to allow a short block replacement isn't working.
I think the problem here is the engineering department. They seem to be making the decisions, and are deciding that rebuilding is a better solution then a shortblock.
sounds about like chrysler to me. they cheap out on doing the right thing on repairs, forcing you to come back time and time again with their band aids, yet the sales team where you bought it damn sure want your hard earned money to buy another one.
if the service department would make things right in the first time, that may be a possibility.
ive had my diff fail 3 times. 2 in 360 miles. first fail was pinion nut back off. replaced pinion bearings,seals
second fail was carrier bearing fail. replaced all internals but carrier
last fail was pinion nut again. once again replacing all internals except carrier.
prolly close to $2500 in parts alone and no one knows why the pinion nut keeps backing off.
Last edited by Cmerritt84; Dec 17, 2012 at 05:19 PM.
Captain
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 664
Likes: 0
From: Wisconsin
Here's an update.
-Again, piston # 1 clearance measure .0030 thousand of an inch, and the allowable clearance is 0.0023 thousand of an inch (the numbers are exactly right, including thousands of an inch, or hundreds, I dunno, but you get the idea. Clearance on # 1 was too great)
-They say they are ordering new piston for # 1, and new rings, and honing the cylinder.
-New bearings for 1 and 2 are being ordered.
-They are NOT touching the journals.
-They are not re-balancing anything
Here are updated pictures of the journal, and bearing 1 and 2
This is the LOWER bearing on # 2 piston. Piston bearing # 1 looks similar, but not as bad
This is the uppder bearing on # 2 piston. Piston bearing # 1 looks similar, but not as bad
This is the journal for pistons 1 and 2
-Again, piston # 1 clearance measure .0030 thousand of an inch, and the allowable clearance is 0.0023 thousand of an inch (the numbers are exactly right, including thousands of an inch, or hundreds, I dunno, but you get the idea. Clearance on # 1 was too great)
-They say they are ordering new piston for # 1, and new rings, and honing the cylinder.
-New bearings for 1 and 2 are being ordered.
-They are NOT touching the journals.
-They are not re-balancing anything
Here are updated pictures of the journal, and bearing 1 and 2
This is the LOWER bearing on # 2 piston. Piston bearing # 1 looks similar, but not as bad
This is the uppder bearing on # 2 piston. Piston bearing # 1 looks similar, but not as bad
This is the journal for pistons 1 and 2
Honing a cylinder wall that is already seven tenth larger then high tolerance is oxymoron.
Looking at your photos with the upper/lower piston bearing and the journals for piston one and two... My opinion, that is a significant amount of chatter. To try and machine this chatter, (Which itself is a daunting task if possible at all) and not rebalance, complete waste of time.
I'll admit, I do not know the correct specs, or what the high and low tolerance is, but in my shop, seven tenth is a mile to me.
Hopefully they correct this without making you jump through hoops in there intended course of action.
Last edited by POWER SEDAN; Dec 17, 2012 at 10:13 PM.
Thread Starter
|
Professional
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 128
Likes: 1
Wow, as mentioned several times, what a waste of any effort. I machine pistons (at a slighty different scale), and I've seen simular circumstances as this.
Honing a cylinder wall that is already seven tenth larger then high tolerance is oxymoron.
Looking at your photos with the upper/lower piston bearing and the journals for piston one and two... My opinion, that is a significant amount of chatter. To try and machine this chatter, (Which itself is a daunting task if possible at all) and not rebalance, complete waste of time.
I'll admit, I do not know the correct specs, or what the high and low tolerance is, but in my shop, seven tenth is a mile to me.
Hopefully they correct this without making you jump through hoops in there intended course of action.
Honing a cylinder wall that is already seven tenth larger then high tolerance is oxymoron.
Looking at your photos with the upper/lower piston bearing and the journals for piston one and two... My opinion, that is a significant amount of chatter. To try and machine this chatter, (Which itself is a daunting task if possible at all) and not rebalance, complete waste of time.
I'll admit, I do not know the correct specs, or what the high and low tolerance is, but in my shop, seven tenth is a mile to me.
Hopefully they correct this without making you jump through hoops in there intended course of action.
Captain
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 664
Likes: 0
From: Wisconsin
Have you seen the cylinder wall yet, or any photos to share?
I don't get reordering a new piston, was the original piston undersized and the cylinder bore was oversized, or vis versa?
If the cylinder diameter of the cylinder was within spec size, and there's evidence of simular damage to the cylinder wall, honing the cylinder wall will require at least .002, to make any attempt to achieve roundness and surface finish. That being said are they ordering a custom piston to match new specs after honing, if they're still debating wether to hone the cylinder wall.
My opinion, wasting way to much time, get a new short block, chances are its a problem down the road. I don't understand their philosophy on replacing this, machining that, ignoring this.
I don't get reordering a new piston, was the original piston undersized and the cylinder bore was oversized, or vis versa?
If the cylinder diameter of the cylinder was within spec size, and there's evidence of simular damage to the cylinder wall, honing the cylinder wall will require at least .002, to make any attempt to achieve roundness and surface finish. That being said are they ordering a custom piston to match new specs after honing, if they're still debating wether to hone the cylinder wall.
My opinion, wasting way to much time, get a new short block, chances are its a problem down the road. I don't understand their philosophy on replacing this, machining that, ignoring this.
Thread Starter
|
Professional
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 128
Likes: 1
Have you seen the cylinder wall yet, or any photos to share?
I don't get reordering a new piston, was the original piston undersized and the cylinder bore was oversized, or vis versa?
If the cylinder diameter of the cylinder was within spec size, and there's evidence of simular damage to the cylinder wall, honing the cylinder wall will require at least .002, to make any attempt to achieve roundness and surface finish. That being said are they ordering a custom piston to match new specs after honing, if they're still debating wether to hone the cylinder wall.
My opinion, wasting way to much time, get a new short block, chances are its a problem down the road. I don't understand their philosophy on replacing this, machining that, ignoring this.
I don't get reordering a new piston, was the original piston undersized and the cylinder bore was oversized, or vis versa?
If the cylinder diameter of the cylinder was within spec size, and there's evidence of simular damage to the cylinder wall, honing the cylinder wall will require at least .002, to make any attempt to achieve roundness and surface finish. That being said are they ordering a custom piston to match new specs after honing, if they're still debating wether to hone the cylinder wall.
My opinion, wasting way to much time, get a new short block, chances are its a problem down the road. I don't understand their philosophy on replacing this, machining that, ignoring this.
Here's a picture of the cylinder. Don't mind the color light relfections.
Captain
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 664
Likes: 0
From: Wisconsin
I work on a different scale of non-combustible pistons, (seven frame hydraulic pumps at 6,500-20k PSI) common principles, but very tight tolerances. When field units are returned, warranty or not, I never reuse any parts with premature (As seen on the journal), especially when chatter/scoring is evident. As mentioned once roundness is tarnished, scrap it, its prone to cause future problems
Last edited by POWER SEDAN; Dec 23, 2012 at 10:41 PM. Reason: darn auto-correct... lol