cevans
Active Member
- Nov 1, 2015
- 141
- 90
- Truck Year
- 2014
In late July FCA changed the oil specification for our trucks. All unsold 2016 were to be drained and refilled immediately before sale and any truck that was in for service is to be drained and refilled as well. Without any type of explanation we're left to wonder why all this happened.
I'm thinking that there are grounds for a class-action lawsuit against FCA for this under these two scenarios.
1) The oil specification that was originally used was discovered to be grossly under-protecting internal engine components. This means that for years owners and dealers used a recommended oil that was actually very harmful to their engines. Since engine damage resulted directly from the requirements put forward by FCA, it is my belief that FCA should compensate owners who suffered engine failure and bore the cost of engine repair or replacement AND should compensate all those who used oil according to their recommendation with monetary compensation for future repairs made necessary by increased internal engine wear and/or extended warranties for these owners.
2) The oil specification originally used is fine, however, FCA changed the specification for inventory simplicity and or cost savings. Notably, the new specification for 5w40 has a negative impact on engine efficiency and accordingly fuel economy - these trucks got their EPA numbers under the requirement that they used a high-efficiency 5w30 oil. By changing the oil specification the MPG numbers of this truck have been lowered below their EPA estimates, and FCA should compensate owners for their increased fuel consumption in accordance with previous settlements with other manufacturers such as Hyundai who also needed to adjust their MPG numbers downward years after selling the cars in the US market.
I'm thinking that there are grounds for a class-action lawsuit against FCA for this under these two scenarios.
1) The oil specification that was originally used was discovered to be grossly under-protecting internal engine components. This means that for years owners and dealers used a recommended oil that was actually very harmful to their engines. Since engine damage resulted directly from the requirements put forward by FCA, it is my belief that FCA should compensate owners who suffered engine failure and bore the cost of engine repair or replacement AND should compensate all those who used oil according to their recommendation with monetary compensation for future repairs made necessary by increased internal engine wear and/or extended warranties for these owners.
2) The oil specification originally used is fine, however, FCA changed the specification for inventory simplicity and or cost savings. Notably, the new specification for 5w40 has a negative impact on engine efficiency and accordingly fuel economy - these trucks got their EPA numbers under the requirement that they used a high-efficiency 5w30 oil. By changing the oil specification the MPG numbers of this truck have been lowered below their EPA estimates, and FCA should compensate owners for their increased fuel consumption in accordance with previous settlements with other manufacturers such as Hyundai who also needed to adjust their MPG numbers downward years after selling the cars in the US market.
Last edited:
