[JC Hemi]

I know this is old news but saw this and thought it was interesting.

Why Dodge Was Right To Refuse To Replace 800-Mile Blown-Up Hellcat Engine

A brand-new 2023 Dodge Challenger SRT Hellcat Jailbreak's engine blew up after 800 miles, and Dodge refuses to repair the $36,000 engine - here's why.

www.hotcars.com

I think I will wait until my warranty is up then go with a reputable tuner with years of experience.

 

[Vice-White]

You play you pay.

 

[Duh-rango]

Yup. Also some states (CA) are now looking at the CVN of the PCM so just installing an unlocked PCM could cause you to fail emissions.

ARSC News - Spring 2020 Cal ID and CVN Detect Programming Modifications

The Bureau of Automotive Repair’s - Automotive Repair and Smog Check Newsletter Spring 2020 edition - Cal ID and CVN Detect Programming Modifications.

www.bar.ca.gov

 

[S8ER01Z]

That’s why I’m stuck with stock power until my warranty runs out. Not worth it

 

[DDC]

let's point out the elephant in the room though. yes, tuning is bad, warranty-wise. but this engine blew at the 800 mile mark??? that means NO ATTENTION was given to an engine break in period. at 800 miles you should still be baby-ing that throttle. and this car already had a tune and muffler delete? at 800 miles?

this warranty claim deserves to be denied if that is the case.

 

[JC Hemi]

I think it was a bad tune regardless of break miles…

Either way, factory knows when the ECM has been altered so buyer beware!

 

[Vice-White]

It was a bad tune because on day one, that HC or any other engine should run as hard as it can without causing issues. Would I do it, no way but engines today are built to do just that. The tune = Let's lean out the A/F for some more ponies = BOOM!

What is F'd is the guy tried to get the engine covered under the warranty, knowing he was in violation.

 

[JC Hemi]

Vice-white is 100% CORRECT!

 

[Centex16]

It was a bad tune because on day one, that HC or any other engine should run as hard as it can without causing issues. Would I do it, no way but engines today are built to do just that. The tune = Let's lean out the A/F for some more ponies = BOOM!

What is F'd is the guy tried to get the engine covered under the warranty, knowing he was in violation.

That’s how I break in a new engine. Sideways out of the dealership and drive them hard. No leaks, no issues, no oil consumption.

 

[BionicChimp]

That’s how I break in a new engine. Sideways out of the dealership and drive them hard. No leaks, no issues, no oil consumption.

Turn and burn

 

[baldrick]

Break-in is still fairly important, but today's engines are made to such close tolerances that break in is not really all that essential. Nobody these days pays attention to break in like we did in the 70s and 80s.
I used to work at a major American motorcar maker's engine facility that built an "old-school" V8 engine design that had been around since the late '50s and a second manufacturing line producing modern V8s.
The allowable tolerances on the "old" line were all loose enough that they'd be considered scrap parts on the new line (where things like the tolerance for deck and head flatness, for instance) were less than 6 microns.

Anyway, I think Stellantis was right in denying the warranty. And I'm impressed they had the mechanisms in place to detect ECM tampering.
That said, I firmly believe it's everyone's right to tamper if they so choose.

 

[BionicChimp]

Break-in is still fairly important, but today's engines are made to such close tolerances that break in is not really all that essential. Nobody these days pays attention to break in like we did in the 70s and 80s.
I used to work at a major American motorcar maker's engine facility that built an "old-school" V8 engine design that had been around since the late '50s and a second manufacturing line producing modern V8s.
The allowable tolerances on the "old" line were all loose enough that they'd be considered scrap parts on the new line (where things like the tolerance for deck and head flatness, for instance) were less than 6 microns.

Anyway, I think Stellantis was right in denying the warranty. And I'm impressed they had the mechanisms in place to detect ECM tampering.
That said, I firmly believe it's everyone's right to tamper if they so choose.

Let me guess the plant. GM St. Catherine's??

 

[baldrick]

Can't confirm nor deny...

 

[okfoz]

This is across the board. MAnufacturers will no longer cover your tuned engine, GM, Ford, Honda, Toyota, it does not matter, no one covers a custom tuned engine. Of course sometimes manufacturers do offer a "Tune" but they are probably conservative compared to what you get aftermarket. So the exceptions are "approved" Tunes from the manufacturer.

Coming in as a former Ford Explorer ST owner, I know Ford did have plans for tunes for the Explorer ST at one time, not sure if they went through with it or not. Of course Ford also offered a Roush Supercharger on their mustangs through the dealers. However here is the catch, Ford no longer covered the warranty for the engine, that was transferred to Roush. I am not sure if Stilantis has any tunes or not.

 

[6104696]

Magnusson Moss says (essentially) that a warranty claim can be denied if an owners act or ommission contributes to a failure (remember, a warranty only covers manufacturing defects, in theory). So any mod that puts additional stress on any driveline components is going to give them grounds to deny a warranty claim, and this sounds like a completely justifiable denial.

Now if the guy had a tune and his power window motor failed under warranty, or his paint started to peel, that would not likely be a justifiable grounds for denial. Mod at your own risk.

 

[mjreiland]

I worked at GM for many years, they were starting to get some interesting ways of detecting tunes, or in most cases #'s of ECM reflashes. I remember talking to a Powetrain engineer, I think it was on the CTSV that they were storing the Flash counts in multiple modules on the car including the module that controls the windows and locks. Essentially every time you flash it it goes up including the flash to try and return it back to stock before bringing it in for service. So when they plugged it in, if you had +2 on your flash count from the last time a GM dealer had scanned the vehicle, it was a tell-tale you had a tune in it..... This came to be a very big deal also on the Duramax trucks since people were adding like 200+ ft/lbs tunes which in theory could really stress the driveline.

 

[JC Hemi]

Yeah heard the same thing on another forum...

An e-fuse is just a cryptographic algorithm that is set at the time it's initially flashed. If you flash anything with an aftermarket tuner, you would not have the private key used for digitally-signing the tune. If the signature is not derived from the auto maker's root private, the e-fuse is considered "tripped". If that is the case, restoring the stock tune with an aftermarket programmer wouldn't really help.

Big brother is watching everything.. LOL

 

[Duh-rango]

So even if you install the stock PCM back into the vehicle you will get a P1400 code which is stored on other modules like the BCM. There was a member on the HP tuners forum that stated he could clear this but needed the vehicle to do so. However, there is still the fact that modules store how many times they were flashed.

Simply put, if a warranty is that important to someone then they should wait until it is expired before messing with the vehicle.

 

[MikeD1]

What's really interesting about this case is the #7 cyl/piston failed. That specific failure is popping up more & more on 'tuned' engines being pushed to the limit.
Could be this guy was just plain unlucky, but more likely he had a bad tune and/or bad gas and was pushing the car HARD, then pop goes the weasel (or #7 pot in this case).
Would be really, really interesting to know who the tuner was and if this was a custom or just 'canned' tune !

 

[JC Hemi]

Yeah I am curious who the tuner is so I can stay away from them.

I bet you a cold beer that #7 cylinder is unequal compared to the others (i.e., intake manifold runner design). The tuner probably set all cylinders to the same parameters instead of custom tuning for; A/F ratio and ignition timing. Oh, I bet "Knock" was disabled too. Sounds like a starved cylinder, in-turn that damaged the motor.

Also, bet you a case of beer, that this was a mail-order tune and not adjusted in real time on a dyno or even data-logging runs/pulls and then adjusted accordingly.

Heck, but what do I know... I have only been buying, driving, racing, building, tuning cars for over 30 years. LOL