China Bans Wrangler Imports For Fire Risk: Where's The Fix?

Edward Niedermeyer
by Edward Niedermeyer

Over the weekend, Chinadaily [via CarNewsChina] reported that China’s General Administration of Quality Supervision, Inspection and Quarantine had halted imports of Jeep Wranglers due to what was reported as

fires [caused by] a problem in the vehicles’ automatic transmission and related systems.

And though for some this story’s value may begin and end with the ironic humor value of China recalling unsafe American products, there’s more to this than meets the eye. As it turns out, NHTSA has investigated a suspiciously similar transmission-related fire risk in Wranglers, and made Chrysler fix it. What’s not clear is why China-bound Jeeps don’t appear to have received the upgrade that US regulators required for American-market sales.

According to a Chrysler letter to NHTSA obtained by TTAC [ PDF here], an estimated 161,450 Wranglers from model years 2007 and 2008 were recalled towards the end of 2009 in order to address reports of transmission-related fires during off-road driving. In its letter to the US auto safety regulator, Chrysler laid out the following timeline for the recall:

Beginning in October 2008, Chrysler received a report of a failed transmission from an overheat condition that resulted while driving off road.

Subsequent engineering analysis confirmed that while operating a vehicle under rigorous off road conditions, a vehicle’s transmission fluid temperature will elevate.

Exceeding the limits of a vehicle beyond reasonable intended usage over an extended period will cause the transmission fluid to expel, and may allow it to come into contact with a hot exhaust component and cause a fire.

July of 2009, China Administration of Quality Supervision, Inspection and Quarantine (AQSIQ) initiated contact with Chrysler inquiring about 3 incidents allegedly resulting from transmission fluid overheat (2 determined to be non-related, I unverified not available for inspection).


On September 13,2009, NHTSA’s Office ofDefects Investigation (ODI) opened a Preliminary Evaluation (PE09-037) to investigate allegations of transmission overheat conditions.

An investigation ofJK vehicles concluded that there is no design related defect that would cause the transmission to overheat under normal operating conditions.

Warranty data and field reports support that a small number of transmission warranty is due to an overheat condition caused by extreme and/or abusive driving conditions.

There are only a few field reports alleging transmission failures resulting from elevated temperatures.

The prior Jeep Wrangler (TJ) body style provided a transmission temperature warning lamp.

A warning system to alert the customer when transmission fluid has reached a critical operating temperature would significantly reduce potential for transmission failures.

There has been no reported transmission failures related to overheat during normal operating

Chrysler is not aware of any injuries or fatalities as a result of this condition.

What’s most interesting about this chain of events is that NHTSA opened an investigation in the wake of Chinese government action over the defect, forcing Chrysler to recall and inspect 94,025 Wranglers by the end of last year, some 91,868 of which were repaired [per a Chrysler follow-up filing with NHTSA, in PDF here]. Now, we don’t know exactly what actions Chrysler took to repair imported Wranglers in China, but the fact that none of the three vehicles involved in incidents at the time of the July 2009 investigation were found to have related defects indicates that little or nothing was done to address this issue in the Chinese market.

Here in the US, the fix wasn’t complicated. As Chrysler had admitted, the TJ Wrangler had a transmission temperature warning guage, and this was the “fix” that was agreed upon for the US market. Since there is no way to guarantee safety in all off-road uses, including a warning when transmission temperatures rise makes good sense. Thus, Chrysler told NHTSA that it

will conduct a safety recall to install a “HOTOIL” message in the Instrument Cluster and a chime indicating an elevated transmission fluid condition. Chrysler will also provide owners with an Owner’s Manual Addendum stating the purpose of the “HOTOIL” message and chime along with instructions with a Caution and Warning statements regarding elevated transmission fluid temperature conditions.

So, if all Wranglers built for the US market received an extra light in the dash to warn of elevated transmission temperatures, why are export-market versions (at least for China) not equipped with the same instrument cluster? Would it not ultimately cost more to have two separate instrument assemblies for domestic sales and exports? And surely Chinese regulators would recognize that this fix would allow drivers to avoid any transmission-related fires, so why halt imports? One conspiracy-minded possibility: this could be tied to China’s trade war-motivated accusation of subsidies and dumping by GM and Chrysler.

We will continue to dig into this story to see if, in fact, Jeep builds its export-market Wranglers without the NHTSA-mandated fix built into all US-market Wranglers. If you own an export-market Wrangler from 2007 or later, or if you work on or assemble Wranglers, please share your expertise in the comments section. Though Chrysler isn’t obligated to comply with US regulations for its export-market products, last year’s Toyota recall scandal proved that failing to address safety concerns on a global basis can create huge PR headaches.

Edward Niedermeyer
Edward Niedermeyer

More by Edward Niedermeyer

Comments
Join the conversation
5 of 22 comments
  • Pete Zaitcev Pete Zaitcev on Apr 12, 2011

    As far as I know, all this "hard off-road use" story is bogus. What actually happens is that some of 42RLEs simply run hot from the factory. So, a few people got HOTOIL indication just going uphill on a freeway. If you take one of the unlucky trannies to the trail, you can overheat it easily. Chrysler either cannot figure it out, or know and refuse to tell us if any specific lots or subcontractors are linked to bad transmissions. Mine is one of the majority "lucky" ones, I can wheel as hard as I like in New Mexico heat, and nothing happens to it. Ideally Chrysler should've replaced bad transmissions, but there is no way to figure out which are which, unless you put each JK on a dino or something. So they devised this HOTOIL mod just so the drivers know when they are screwed. I'm somewhat ambivalent about it. Yes they are cheapscates, but hey... Lemons happen. P.S. The annoying part is that if your JK hotoils you on the street, Chrysler won't swap the tranny, but suggest you to rest at the side of the road. That's uncool, IMHO.

    • See 2 previous
    • Wheeljack Wheeljack on Apr 13, 2011

      @Pete Zaitcev I'd personally be adding a cooler to any of the vehicles that use this transmission. It doesn't help that the modern methodology of deliberately "smoothing out" the shifts in the name of customer satisfaction (wouldn't want to feel those pesky shifts, now would we?) also generates a tremendous amount of heat due to the friction plate slipping technique used to surpress the sensation of shifting. This is precisely why modern automatic transmissions scare me from a durability perspective - a clean firm shift is a "cool" shift that generates a minimal amount of heat and unwanted friction, sadly no one seems to want that anymore and for those of us that do, most modern electronic transmissions don't respond as well to shift kits (they tend to "learn" and compensate to a degree) assuming one is even available. Sigh...welcome to the law of unintended consequences.

  • Vento97 Vento97 on Apr 13, 2011

    Don't drive this vehicle unless your name is Hellboy...

  • Jalop1991 In a manner similar to PHEV being the correct answer, I declare RPVs to be the correct answer here.We're doing it with certain aircraft; why not with cars on the ground, using hardware and tools like Telsa's "FSD" or GM's "SuperCruise" as the base?Take the local Uber driver out of the car, and put him in a professional centralized environment from where he drives me around. The system and the individual car can have awareness as well as gates, but he's responsible for the driving.Put the tech into my car, and let me buy it as needed. I need someone else to drive me home; hit the button and voila, I've hired a driver for the moment. I don't want to drive 11 hours to my vacation spot; hire the remote pilot for that. When I get there, I have my car and he's still at his normal location, piloting cars for other people.The system would allow for driver rest period, like what's required for truckers, so I might end up with multiple people driving me to the coast. I don't care. And they don't have to be physically with me, therefore they can be way cheaper.Charge taxi-type per-mile rates. For long drives, offer per-trip rates. Offer subscriptions, including miles/hours. Whatever.(And for grins, dress the remote pilots all as Johnnie.)Start this out with big rigs. Take the trucker away from the long haul driving, and let him be there for emergencies and the short haul parts of the trip.And in a manner similar to PHEVs being discredited, I fully expect to be razzed for this brilliant idea (not unlike how Alan Kay wasn't recognized until many many years later for his Dynabook vision).
  • B-BodyBuick84 Not afraid of AV's as I highly doubt they will ever be %100 viable for our roads. Stop-and-go downtown city or rush hour highway traffic? I can see that, but otherwise there's simply too many variables. Bad weather conditions, faded road lines or markings, reflective surfaces with glare, etc. There's also the issue of cultural norms. About a decade ago there was actually an online test called 'The Morality Machine' one could do online where you were in control of an AV and choose what action to take when a crash was inevitable. I think something like 2.5 million people across the world participated? For example, do you hit and most likely kill the elderly couple strolling across the crosswalk or crash the vehicle into a cement barrier and almost certainly cause the death of the vehicle occupants? What if it's a parent and child? In N. America 98% of people choose to hit the elderly couple and save themselves while in Asia, the exact opposite happened where 98% choose to hit the parent and child. Why? Cultural differences. Asia puts a lot of emphasis on respecting their elderly while N. America has a culture of 'save/ protect the children'. Are these AV's going to respect that culture? Is a VW Jetta or Buick Envision AV going to have different programming depending on whether it's sold in Canada or Taiwan? how's that going to effect legislation and legal battles when a crash inevitibly does happen? These are the true barriers to mass AV adoption, and in the 10 years since that test came out, there has been zero answers or progress on this matter. So no, I'm not afraid of AV's simply because with the exception of a few specific situations, most avenues are going to prove to be a dead-end for automakers.
  • Mike Bradley Autonomous cars were developed in Silicon Valley. For new products there, the standard business plan is to put a barely-functioning product on the market right away and wait for the early-adopter customers to find the flaws. That's exactly what's happened. Detroit's plan is pretty much the opposite, but Detroit isn't developing this product. That's why dealers, for instance, haven't been trained in the cars.
  • Dartman https://apnews.com/article/artificial-intelligence-fighter-jets-air-force-6a1100c96a73ca9b7f41cbd6a2753fdaAutonomous/Ai is here now. The question is implementation and acceptance.
  • FreedMike If Dodge were smart - and I don't think they are - they'd spend their money refreshing and reworking the Durango (which I think is entering model year 3,221), versus going down the same "stuff 'em full of motor and give 'em cool new paint options" path. That's the approach they used with the Charger and Challenger, and both those models are dead. The Durango is still a strong product in a strong market; why not keep it fresher?
Next