Those shopping for a new Charger, 300, Wrangler or 1500 because of the powertrain warranty may need to pull the trigger soon due to an upcoming mileage cut.
According to the following statement, FCA US is cutting the warranty down from the current 5-year/100,000-mile guarantee to a new 5-year/60,000-mile term for the 2016 model year, Automotive News reports:
Following changes already made by competitors, FCA US is adjusting powertrain warranty coverage for 2016 model year vehicles to be more consistent with industry practices. For 2016MY, Chrysler, Jeep, Dodge and Ram Truck vehicles with gasoline engines will be covered by a 5-year/60,000 mile powertrain warranty.
An FCA representative says the company’s 3-year/36,000-mile bumper-to-bumper warranty will remain unchanged, while diesels, Alfas and Fiats are not affected by the policy change; Fiat has its own 4-year/50,000-mile powertrain warranty.
The move follows General Motors’ decision in March 2015 to cut-down its 5-year/100,000-mile powertrain warranty for its Chevrolet and GMC products to a 5-year/60,000-mile policy.
[Source: Alex L. Dykes/The Truth About Cars]
You’d think they’d go the OTHER direction and increase while pointing out GM offers less.
This is a great example of asymmetrical information.
They (the car makers) have reams of data. They know what breaks and roughly when. From this, they can “silent warranty”, or “TSB”, or “new part number”…but if things really go wrong, then “recall notices”….
How do you think they know exactly how cheap they can go ? It is not being cheap, rather, it is knowing how little you need to spend for a part while keeping an “acceptable” return rate. More complicated than it looks, and requires a lot of intelligence.
We have TrueCar and a few others, but the size of the dataset can’t be compared with the OE and warranty claims. Much like the actual cost to construct a car, this is a State Secret, and no one is talking. We are still doing better because before the internet, the only place you could learn this outside the corporate HQ would be at the bar after a Service Managers’ Convention.
So, B & B, what part of these cars dies between 60k and 100k ?
Good question.
It doesn’t really matter.
We all know FCA’s products are so well built they could send them out AS IS-NO WARRANTY and the consumer would not get hurt at all.
Being INCONSISTENT with industry practices – when it comes to warranty – is what can give you a competitive edge.
This is obviously a cost-cutting measure, because if their claim rate was acceptably low they could keep the 100k warranty in place.
This is NOT a matter of “the customers don’t care”, because mere warranty words – even if they mean nothing to new buyers – mean something to the accountants.
Chrysler nearly went under from their old 7/70 warranty many years ago, and changed it back to something more mundane. This feels like a rerun of that scenario.
Yeah, it makes me really not want to buy any FCA product.
If you won’t warrant it for 100k, but will for 60k, that tells me the failure rate is unafforably high (for FCA) between 60k and 100k.
Which… why would I want that?
(Hell, my local Toyota dealer will give me a *lifetime* powertrain warranty on a Toyota.)
I guess you shouldn’t buy one from their competitors either.
Your local Toyota dealer pays for that lifetime warranty and adds it to cost of sale. The dodge dealer could offer the same product as well.
Except the cost for the Toyota powertrain warranty would be cheaper.
What does reliability data show?
Has FCA had a lot of problems with powertrains?
I’ve had none.
Sorry bigtruck but you are just one person and if you really trust in your product you keep the warranty since it won’t be used it doesn’t cost you anything. First GM and FCA.
Check out Truedelta
ex http://www.truedelta.com/Dodge-Charger/reliability-76
I did, mostly minor stuff
That’s the past. The change is for future vehicles. The biggest power train change at FCA was the switch from the old Mercedes 5-speed automatic transmission to the FCA-made ZF 8-speed auto, and now the 9-speed automatic. They have three years of data on the 8-speed, and are putting FCA-built 8s and 9s on everything that used to have the MB 5-speed. The power train warranty reduction at the same time seems… ominous.
That’s the reason I have a Hemi and 5spd auto in my ’11 300C. I wasn’t paying money on a new car to beta-test the (then) new Pentastar and ZF 8spd.
I feel the same way about CVTs and direct inject engines. Maybe in 10 years once they’ve worked out the bugs, but I ain’t beta testing on my dime.
We typically keep our cars 8 – 10 years, running them 95,000 – 120,000 miles before trading them. In my 40 years of driving, I’ve needed exactly one powertrain repair, and that was on a 1974 Opel, which was covered under the then 12 month/12,000 mile bumper to bumper warranty. I find it hard to believe that the cost of this additional coverage is significant, and wonder why it is being removed, unless FCA thinks that having the additional coverage would give buyers the impression that they think their vehicles are less reliable and need a longer warranty to induce buyers.
I usually view the warranty as a measure of the mfr’s confidence in their product. Exceptions are meaningless ‘lifetime’ warranties, and Toyota’s 5/60 drivetrain warranty which is far too short.
Everybody knew that Hyundai was buying market share when they introduced their 10/100 warranty in 1999, but 16 years on, they still have it, and their products live up to it.
Warranty transfer terms are in the fine print, however, and H/K’s 2nd-hand warranty is 5/60 (from original title date) unless you buy CPO.
Disagree on this:
“Everybody knew that Hyundai was buying market share when they introduced their 10/100 warranty in 1999.”
Not directly, anyway. When you talk about “buying market share,” you’re usually talking about pricing. I agree Hyundai’s warranty is essentially a price cut, in that they were basically throwing in an insurance policy on future repairs at a cost they could project.
But consumers don’t view a warranty as the price cut it is. They view it as quality assurance. What Hyundai was really buying was credibility. Toyota has it, so they don’t have to buy it. Hyundai and Chrysler don’t have it, so they do. Except now, Chrysler won’t be. Bad move.
“unless FCA thinks that having the additional coverage would give buyers the impression that they think their vehicles are less reliable and need a longer warranty to induce buyers.”
Plausible, sort of.
Except I have the reverse idea of FCA transmissions lately – I don’t trust them at all. (See their ZF issues, which aren’t all just bad programming, for the latest iteration.)
A 10/100 warranty tells me that even if they did ship me broken trash, they’ll fix it for well after the car’s paid for.
A 6/60 tells me it’ll break the day I pay off the last payment, so to speak.
(I mean, in terms of how I interpret it, and especially a change from the one to the other, and doubly so “from FCA, right now”.)
“A 6/60 tells me it’ll break the day I pay off the last payment, so to speak.”
Back when we were talking about long term loans, I realized that I should never finance a new car beyond the warranty period, to avoid the downside risk of having a car payment and no way to get to work.
Of course, it’s also important to look at all of the regular issues that come with debt, too, but walking out over financing that exceeds the warranty period is a no-brainer.
My company cut my vacation from 5 weeks to 4 “to be more consistent with corporate practices around the world” After a month of stating my displeasure with this policy and how poorly it was implemented, I got my week back plus a bit more. I’m also more jaded to the company and have started to abuse our personal time off policy. Bean counters think they win, but I wonder…
I’m impressed you can take five weeks per year. We get a maximum total of 22 PTO days, including sick leave, and I never can take them all.
Life’s too short. Time is more valuable than money. If you’re saying your company would block your use of the time they’re allegedly giving you for pto, that’s a whole other issue.
“Life’s too short. Time is more valuable than money.”
Two thumbs up. Truer words were never spoken.
I assume you don’t go to work at all?
Or do you really mean “Once you have a comfortable income of about $80,000 then an additional hour of work is generally not worth it for additional income?”
Because the statistics are pretty clear that zero money is an awful way to try to survive but once you hit about $80K then happiness != more money. Before that, it very much is.
We also have “unlimited” personal time off. We are suppose to use it for sick days etc They won’t tell us what “unlimited” means so I’m abusing it by taking mental health days off.
Hopefully there aren’t more like you there, Fred! Don’t let the shareholders get wind of that.
Agree. Life is too short and the days are numbered.
No one ever laid on their deathbed and thought I wish I would have spent more time at work
“No one ever laid on their deathbed and thought I wish I would have spent more time at work”
Probably not, but many have spent time in the unemployment line mulling that one over.
“No one ever laid on their deathbed and thought I wish I would have spent more time at work”
Agreed. I work to live. What do you get out of life if you live to work? The whole just be happy to have a job thing is such a modern corporate crock. At the whole time I bet you most executives don’t spend half the calendar year in their office, and give themselves raises.
No, what happens is that you can’t get your projects done in the expected time, so you start getting lower priority projects. Then, when a downturn comes along and your employer cuts staff, guess who gets cut.
It doesn’t help if you are part of a less favored group, in my case, I have committed the most grievous error of all, I have permitted myself to age.
“in my case, I have committed the most grievous error of all, I have permitted myself to age.”
Yep, me too. Welcome to Purgatory.
I’d better not mention how many days I get with 25 years of service ;)
I can’t remember the last time I had a day off that wasn’t a holiday.
Like a good 6/10 Chrysler products with mileage between 70-90k go through the block with ‘engine noise’ announcements. You also cannot arbitrate rear-end noise on a Ford or Dodge/Ram of ANY year because excessive rear end noise is apparently an inherent quality of these vehicles.
In other news, there goes my hitherto winning tactic of buying ‘AS-IS’ or yellow-light motor noise cars at one sale, getting them fixed under warranty, running them through another sale, and $$$$.
Finally, unless you have at least two Chrysler products on your back fence with assorted problems waiting for you to throw money at, you’re not doing the ‘used car dealer’ thing right. I currently have three.
I know one of those isn’t that fine New Yorker.
Front-line ready, baby!
There’s a threshold where if I can’t sell that running, driving air-conditioned everything-inside-works-perfectly car for $1400 +++, I’m going to keep it, tag it, put signs on it, and make it our courtesy car. I drove it for three days. Its genuinely nice.
I’m going to be in Tampa/St Pete in July and I know where I’m going after work.
I think you need to just keep it, at least for a while. You also need an SC400 for me to drive, and a Reatta too if you can swing one.
The SC400 has your name on it when I come across one. The second Reatta is, too…the first is mine.
P.S. You’re good luck – sold that NY’er yesterday for $1500 +TTL. I’ll forward you an aged inventory list to start talking about next.
Can we just go ahead and give Flybrian a column already?! I have this insatiable feeling of schadenfreude when I hear about the life and death of used up auction cars.
My brother gets some side work doing diagnostics from used car lots that can’t figure things out themselves sometimes. Recent highlights include a 2004 Galant (BHPH all-star) with a bizzare O2 sensor related CEL issue that was caused by an incompatible wiring harness: turns out it had an engine swap with a 2006 motor! Another interesting case was a 2005 Tuscon with an impossible to solve lean condition on the front bank. Turns out the engine was oil starved at some point, one of the cams on the rear bank started chewing through the journal and heated up so much it shifted timing by about one tooth. The result was a lower compression rear bank drawing less air past the MAF sensor, resulting in reduced injector pulse width on the front bank! I’ll have to ask him if he has any good Chryco stories…
Column, hell, I want a book. Make that plural.
I second this. I was working on a story arc for my time in the business but it will be a good year I suspect before anything tangible is written.
It is cost cutting “pure and simple” or “cheap and dirty” depending on your glass filling preference.
Companies do post overall warranty costs indirectly on there quarterly and yearly reports. Chrysler/Dodge/Jeep/Ram has had a poor track record with durability. JD Power tends to give them low ratings and Consumer Reports doesn’t score them well either.
At least FCA isn’t spinning BS like GM did. GM said that internal studies revealed new-vehicle customers weren’t interested in what kind of warranty was available and would be reinvested into buyer programs that customers hold as a stronger priority.
Maybe FCA will release a statement saying that money saved will be reinvested in finding a merger partner or finding one more model to fit the Hellcat engine in to. Fiat 500 Hellcat anyone? ;)
Now, if they could shoehorn that thing into a Dart, someone might actually buy that.
They’d be – gloriously – insane, mind you, but they might do it.
“Fiat 500 Hellcat anyone?”
Now you’re talking. I wonder if you could fit the engine in back… If you want to go full bore, keep the one in front and get the total to 875 or so. Now you’re *really* talking.
PeriSoft – now that would be an interesting hybrid ;)
Hellcat 500 AWD manual with a real handbrake please. Call it the Fiat pirouette.
Fiat 500 Hellcat or Pirouette, I can dream.
Again, just as with the GM thing, it’s probably to free up money that would otherwise need to be specifically set aside and allocated for potential warranty claims. It’s probably not very much on a per-vehicle basis, but would, as a whole, amount to millions when you add up all of the vehicles that FCA will sell in the next several years.
I vote this – it’s an accounting issue more than anything. This makes the books look better.
Making some sort of merger/joint venture possibly more attractive. Or…if we want to “read tea leaves”, all the merger/consolidation talk isn’t genuine, but it’s Sergio’s way of testing the market for a buyer?
As does removing courtesy lights and map pockets. It’s giving you less for your money and pocketing the difference, period.
….It’s probably not very much on a per-vehicle basis, but would, as a whole, amount to millions when you add up all of the vehicles that FCA will sell in the next several years….
Classic old school Detroit thinking. A much better way of thinking would be “let’s add time or mileage to our warranty and we can build up confidence with customers which will eventually result in more cars sold” You know, a bit upfront results in more later.
Do not expect tractor like reliability and longevity with today’s modern engines,with their smaller bearing surfaces,no iron cylinders walls and increased loads.Its not in their interest to sell you cars that last decades and that can also be abused ,without any problems.These are not like Japanese motorcycles that last forever.
Funny, cars rarely seem to have catastrophic engine failures anymore, unless abused or unmaintained, nor do you ever see modern cars blowing blue smoke out the tailpipe like in the olden days. Cars last longer and longer and longer, but all the Chicken Littles here seem to think the sky is falling.
The only way the length of the warranty would even begin to influence a buying decision of mine would be if the vehicles are otherwise utterly identical. And even then, one being available in a better color would mean far more to me.
Owners of some modern GM vehicles would beg to differ with you. Their 3.6 is not exactly a stalwart of engine design.
Yeah there are still quite a few modern engines that suffer sub 100k mile issues. The aforementioned GM V6 with timing chain stretch, any number of VAG engines both gas and diesel with a number of issues (carbon build up on direct injected gas motors, PCV issues, timing chain stretch on V6s, fuel pump failures on TDIs). On the transmission side of things there is the initial batch of ford DCT PowerShifts, any number of Nissan CVTs. That’s not to say that things were better before, but I do reckon that in the past 5-7 years, the advent of several key technologies (direct injection, dual clutch transmissions, high pressure turbocharging of small displacement engines, diesel particulate filters). I think we’ll see reliability improve as the kinks get worked out.
How modern are we talking?
Because “modern” engines of the past decade seem to regularly be going strong at over 150kmi, or even 250kmi in the high-miler ones.
I’m with krhodes – realistically speaking and overall, I think engine longevity in passenger vehicles is probably the highest it’s *ever* been, not lower.
(Sure, some old engines lasted a really long time, like the OM-61x or the Ford 300 straight 6 [which really was a tractor engine].
But modern engines can last just as long, and without being giant, heavy, noisy, underpowered monsters.)
What I believe you’re neglecting is powerful computer and sensor based engine management. In the old days – engines had to be robust in order to deal with massive variance in materials, manufacturing, operating conditions, and primitive mechanical “engine management” systems. Today’s engines benefit from technological advances in rigid materials, fluids, and modern engine-management and sensor arrays. Technology has removed a lot of the unknowns, or variances, from the design conditions of the old days. I’ll take a modern engine with modern tech every day of the week – they’re cleaner, more powerful, and almost invariably more reliable.
Engine failure is pretty much a non-issue. What is going to take out old cars – even well maintained ones – is electronic component failure. High volume cars will get the aftermarket support once OEM supplies are exhausted. But lower volume and specialty cars will be SOL. Just look at the price of used or NOS electronic brake control modules on eBay for C5 Vettes. And that’s a car with a following. Who’s going to make modules for Fiat 500s?
Either that, or all the plastic stuff will get brittle and break. I suspect most cars go to the salvage yard with good running engines. Transmissions, maybe not so much.
If you can store the car out of the sun, do it.
The plastic in my 12 yo bmw is disintegrating. I’m told it is due to the fact they used recycled plastics. I think it may be true as other plastic is as new, and the rubber around the doors is also still perfect. They all bake in the same sun.
Most cars will go 150-200k with reasonable up keep. Junking a car is always an economic decision. If a 2k trans goes in a 4k car, then, no matter how much some geek will pay for that car, it is junk. Most cars without geek factor are simply worn out.
I completely agree with your central point.
This might have been true up until recently. Many of these new engines are so complicated that even if they don’t have all out failures, small problems become expensive fast. Adding turbos to everything isn’t going to help.
“Its not in their interest to sell you cars that last decades and that can also be abused ,without any problems. These are not like Japanese motorcycles that last forever.”
No, and they’re not like Japanese cars that last forever, either. Speaking as the owner of a second consecutive Japanese car that’s now on its second hundred thousand miles, I feel strongly it’s in MY interest to buy a car that does last. For buyers like me, however many or few of me there are, FCA is spraying buyer repellent on their cars.
FCA must have realized there is more profit in shorter warranties because they are now able to sell more extended warranties.
It’s a win-win for them. Less warranty repairs, more profit on the backend of the sale.
That’s an excellent point.
Perhaps this policy change has nothing to do with the product, but instead they can sell extended warranties as accessories, just like floor mats.
Sounds like the large appliance trade. Ironically the car brands that don’t give buyers build anxiety always get called “appliances” around here. Such a misnomer, as any homeowner will attest.
From my experience, a vast majority of first owners keep their vehicle for less time and mileage than the power train warranty covers. Then the vehicle passes to the second owner who doesn’t have the vehicle serviced per the manufacturer requirements, and uses substandard aftermarket parts for critical components. Then the second owner drags the hulk of a car to the dealer for free warranty work despite clearly not maintaining properly or supporting the manufacturer through dealer services. But since warranty now often covers stupidity, the repairs are still covered on the manufacturers dime.
Keyword–“my experience”.
I don’t know what the majority of owners do but I do know that the actions of myself and my acquaintances might not provide an accurate measure of what the general car buying population does.
That’s OK. Sales and registration numbers can tell us that which we seek. Not much need to extrapolate what others do based on what we do.
This. The average new vehicle buyer keeps their vehicle until just after average 5 year powertrain warranty expires by time, nearly 6 years.
I consider most of commenters and readers of this blog to be far more knowledgeable about vehicles than most consumers, and therefore they enjoy keeping their vehicles longer than most consumers.
How many new car buyers are going to pony up for an extension to a 5y/60km warranty? The majority will have changed hands by either threshold or will be sold shortly thereafter. What sense does a warranty extension make?
My Accord has 94K and is 12 years old, no issues. I am ok with the Honda Warranty and Toyota Warranty, and nobody else with similar or lower warranties!
Growing up outside the U.S. I remember hearing people say American cars are junk, Toyota, Honda, and Datsun is what will last. It still influences me 26 years later. I do think the Mustang, Focus, Fusion Impala, and ATS are awesome, and more reliable than the Germans, but not as stress free as the Japs.
ATS is awesome? Ask the man who owns one: https://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2015/02/reader-review-2014-cadillac-ats/
“ATS is awesome? Ask the man who owns one…”
You do realize the folly inherent with that statement?
I just get the over all feeling Fiat is growing real tired of Chrysler. It was good for getting Fiat/Alfa cars back into the US market, but now it’s time to dump Chrysler. It’s like that restaurant the keeps getting sold to a new owner with high hopes.
Ram and Jeep are a different story. Fiat will be keeping those.
I strongly agree with you – I think this is about selling Chysler/Dodge.
Ummm…….. who in their right mind would want Chrysler/Dodge?
I think it depends on what came with them, especially since the marques have been quasi rehabilitated in the past few years. Those marques plus transferable intellectual property might be attractive at the right price.
@Lou_BC
Given a theoretical, if Chrysler/Dodge or Chevrolet was for sale, which would you take?
zoomzoom91 – Chevrolet as long as pickups and Vette’s were part of the package.
@Lou_BC
Sure, include trucks and the Corvette, but include Ram, too. Everyone calls them Dodge trucks anyway, and then you basically represent the full-line product lineup (less Jeep) for both companies. Chrysler/Dodge/Ram=Chevrolet.
I always thought the 100k powertrain warranties were marketing gimmicks more than anything. On a modern vehicle, especially one I’m buying new, I generally expect what the manufacturer would call the “powertrain” to last 100k miles without significant problems. Things like power equipment, AC compressors, infotainment systems, vehicle control computers, etc, would seem far more likely to do five figure damage to the wallet within the first 100k miles than the powertrain. FCA has very reasonable extended warranties available. 4 members of my family (myself, my parents, and one of my moms sisters) have bought 2 Town & Countrys and 2 Fiat 500s between us over the past 3 years and we all ended up going all the way with a lifetime bumper to bumper unlimited mileage warranty (my Abarth cost $3200 and I think my parents paid similar for their 500C and T&C).
I alway thought the manufacturers had to put money aside for warranty claims before they happened. Maybe this is a way to put less money out and look like they are improving their bottom line.
As an aside, the Lifetime Maxcare warranty from FCA is one of the best out there if you like betting against the quality of their vehicles. (I know I did!)
Our local dealer includes a lifetime warranty on the engine/drivetrain on all new cars and all used cars under 90k miles regardless of brand. The caveat being that they have to do all the service work but with new cars the first 5 years of service is no charge if you can wrangle them out of it.
In case you are wondering, the prices are on par with other local dealers.
@tom_M – I don’t think it’s an unreasonable bet on almost any vehicle. I had an Infiniti I30, that, while a very reliable vehicle that almost never left me stranded, still required costly repairs (even done at an independent shop). A new radiator, AC compressor, and set of 4 shocks each were $1k+ repairs on their own, and that was before the car had super high mileage (I ultimately had to the ac compressor a second time and the shocks a second time). Those are just the big ticket items. never mind the starter, 02 sensor, knock sensor, etc.
@flipper35 – a couple local Mazda dealers offer what they claim is a lifetime nationwide recongized powertrain warranty. Again, to me making powertrain only is a bit of a cop out. I basically assume that a warranty like this means dealer service for the life of the car. When my car is needing an oil leak fixed at 150k miles that’s gonna cost a few grand, I need my dealer to back me up when FCA inevitably tries to come up with some excuse to void the warranty. In my case, purchasing the warranty helped me negotiate a better selling price on the car, since I bought it from my local dealer, and they know they are gonna make $ for years on me in the service department.
This must be a financial decision. There must be a significant number of costly warranty claims after the 60K mileage mark the company is hoping to stop paying for. It is that simple. Message … do not buy the vehcles.
When I bought a new VW Golf in 2002, unbeknownst to me, the model year 2001 100K drive train warranty was cut to 60K. My normally driven auto transmission grenaded during a simple parking lot maneuver at 67K mi.. I interpret that something happened during manufacture, and rather than fixing it, they did an engineering and accounting calculation that rationalized reducing the warranty. Buyers beware.
So, what about rental cars that come up for sale? I just browsed at Hertz, and they claimed that many of their cars for sale were “still under factory warranty”, which (for cars with >36k) would mean the factory powertrain warranty.
I speculate that brands that have a large rental-fleet footprint are at a greater risk of claims against the powertrain warranty.