Jump to content
  • Greetings Guest!

    CheersandGears.com was founded in 2001 and is one of the oldest continuously operating automotive forums out there.  Come see why we have users who visit nearly every day for the past 16+ years. Signup is fast and free, or you can opt for a premium subscription to view the site ad-free.

William Maley

Chrysler News: NHTSA Investigates Dodge Durango and Ram 1500s Rolling Away

Recommended Posts

Fiat Chrysler Automobiles isn't out of the dog house when it comes to vehicles rolling away. A few months after issuing a recall on a number of models equipped with the stubby transmission lever for rolling away, NHTSA is investigating models equipped with the rotary knob gear selector for the same problem.

The investigation is looking at the 2013–2016 Ram 1500 and the 2014–2016 Dodge Durango which have the rotary knob selector. NHTSA has gotten 43 complaints about these models moving away. Out of the 43 complaints, 25 have resulted in crashes and another 9 resulted in injuries. NHTSA also says that 34 complaints said the vehicle was moving while in park.

FCA said it is cooperating with the investigation. In the meantime, FCA and NHTSA are urging owners to engage the parking brake

Source: NHTSA, Reuters


View full article

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seriously, turn it to the left until you can't turn it anymore and ou are in park people.  I have used these in the 200 and Ram and had no issue.  It disturbs me that people can't operate an automatic shifter these days.  God forbid those people try to drive something with a manual. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Stew said:

Seriously, turn it to the left until you can't turn it anymore and ou are in park people.  I have used these in the 200 and Ram and had no issue.  It disturbs me that people can't operate an automatic shifter these days.  God forbid those people try to drive something with a manual. 

Have you actually talked to any of these owners having these problems? Seems rather presumptuous to assume their issues if you haven't. Now, if it is because of basic ignorance, then yes these people are hopeless but if you don't know for certain than that is a whole other ballgame. For the record, I think you may be right but since I haven't spoken to any of the affected drivers, I'll reserve judgement for now. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, surreal1272 said:

Have you actually talked to any of these owners having these problems? Seems rather presumptuous to assume their issues if you haven't. Now, if it is because of basic ignorance, then yes these people are hopeless but if you don't know for certain than that is a whole other ballgame. For the record, I think you may be right but since I haven't spoken to any of the affected drivers, I'll reserve judgement for now. 

It was driver ignorance with the other recall.  These transmissions give audible warnings, the light on the shifters, and 2 or 3 warnings in the cluster if the vehicle is not in park when the door is opened.  I have used this same shifter on multiple vehicles and never had any type of issue.  More than likely they are just forgetting to put it in park when they get out and ignoring the warnings. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Stew said:

It was driver ignorance with the other recall.  These transmissions give audible warnings, the light on the shifters, and 2 or 3 warnings in the cluster if the vehicle is not in park when the door is opened.  I have used this same shifter on multiple vehicles and never had any type of issue.  More than likely they are just forgetting to put it in park when they get out and ignoring the warnings. 

Again I understand what you're saying and I know a lot of the times, the "new tech" is just not familiar enough to some folks but it's still presumptuous to say that's what's going with the affected people now. There are these known as "defects" that could be the problem more than driver error, is what I'm saying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see it as a remote possibility at best, especially since this shifter has been around for nearly 4 years now and this is just coming up.   Remember they have to put a freaking chart in the new Lacrosse because people couldn't understand what is actually a simple shifter to use. 

Edited by Stew

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Having used the shifter in the 300 my first comment is some old person in Florida is going to put one of these through a garage wall.

The shifter is a little on the sensitive side and if you are younger with good joy stick skills it is not an issue. But those who are older and like have had decades of clunky shifter detents it is a point of adaption. Some do and some don't.

Be that as it may any MFG will be faced with the problem is people can't handle it.

On the other hand they could claim they warned people if you should have one coming at you in a parking lot. It does say Dodge or Ram on the car does it not? LOL!

They really needed to add to the sensitivity of the shifter. I have not used the knob but would think the detent for part would be one even a blind man could feel. Feel in a shifter is something many have adopted too. Even in my car I never look I just count the detents.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, hyperv6 said:

Having used the shifter in the 300 my first comment is some old person in Florida is going to put one of these through a garage wall.

The shifter is a little on the sensitive side and if you are younger with good joy stick skills it is not an issue. But those who are older and like have had decades of clunky shifter detents it is a point of adaption. Some do and some don't.

Be that as it may any MFG will be faced with the problem is people can't handle it.

On the other hand they could claim they warned people if you should have one coming at you in a parking lot. It does say Dodge or Ram on the car does it not? LOL!

They really needed to add to the sensitivity of the shifter. I have not used the knob but would think the detent for part would be one even a blind man could feel. Feel in a shifter is something many have adopted too. Even in my car I never look I just count the detents.

It actually has a really good and clear detent between gears.  I am not exactly a kid ya know haha. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Stew said:

It actually has a really good and clear detent between gears.  I am not exactly a kid ya know haha. 

I was not sure on the dial but I do know the 300 does take some adaption if you are not used to it and the old dogs don't learn new tricks well. They got a recall on it but I do not believe they have had it addressed yet. 

I am interested in what they do to change it. I assume a new less sensitive switch?

I have driven some others that were electronic but they were much less sensitive. 

The first couple times I drove it I missed the gear the first try and had to give it a second try. I was holding it too long. 


I did stress to my mother in law to make sure to pay attention to what gear she was in as details in a car are not often her first concern. Shopping yes gear no. 

Edited by hyperv6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, hyperv6 said:

I was not sure on the dial but I do know the 300 does take some adaption if you are not used to it and the old dogs don't learn new tricks well. They got a recall on it but I do not believe they have had it addressed yet. 

I am interested in what they do to change it. I assume a new less sensitive switch?

I have driven some others that were electronic but they were much less sensitive. 

The first couple times I drove it I missed the gear the first try and had to give it a second try. I was holding it too long. 


I did stress to my mother in law to make sure to pay attention to what gear she was in as details in a car are not often her first concern. Shopping yes gear no. 

The rotary is totally different than the original 8 speed shifter in the 12-15 Charger and 300s.  Where it first appeared in the Ram it is designed to be clear and easily usable with gloves.  it took me no time to adapt and the extra space in the center console was nice.  Also, try the shifter in the 15+ LX cars and 16+ Grand Cherokees.  It is sweet, easy to use and actually looks pretty damned good for a factory auto shifter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Stew said:

The rotary is totally different than the original 8 speed shifter in the 12-15 Charger and 300s.  Where it first appeared in the Ram it is designed to be clear and easily usable with gloves.  it took me no time to adapt and the extra space in the center console was nice.  Also, try the shifter in the 15+ LX cars and 16+ Grand Cherokees.  It is sweet, easy to use and actually looks pretty damned good for a factory auto shifter.

I would assume it would be easy to do right as others have done so. But with so many things anymore you have to idiot proof things as people can today  find ways of getting hurt on a Band Aide

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, hyperv6 said:

I would assume it would be easy to do right as others have done so. But with so many things anymore you have to idiot proof things as people can today  find ways of getting hurt on a Band Aide

Unfortunately this is so true.  In the last couple years there have been multiple cases here of people running through buildings (especially Subway restaurants for some reason lol) because they can't tell the difference between the gas and brake pedal and they haven't moved in 100 years haha. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had a '14 300 with the electronic shifter.  I get the complaints about that one.  You got used to the shifter but it was not as intuitive as most shifters.  You could think you were in park and actually be in neutral.  I do not get the issue with the rotary.  My 200 has a rotary and every position is clearly detented and it also has indicators telling you what position you are in.  I don't really understand how people can have issues with the rotary other than the fact it is new and different.  Maybe it is just easier to forget since there isn't a lever staring you in the face?

My questions is, don't some of the European brands (I'm looking at you Mercedes) have overly complicated shifters that are not at all intuitive?  How in the world do they get away without having these same investigations being done?  Do they do a better job with auto application of electronic parking brakes?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem I surmise may be the dial is different. 

People tend to use shifters without any thought but the dial at first needs more attention and is more an opperator error.

The problem is even as a operator issue the mfg pats the price. 

My puzzlement is why go to a dial and take the risk?

Mfg have gone to buttons and other forms of shifter but they always go back to stick and column.

i guess it is hard to change habits from 100 years.

The problem I surmise may be the dial is different. 

People tend to use shifters without any thought but the dial at first needs more attention and is more an opperator error.

The problem is even as a operator issue the mfg pats the price. 

My puzzlement is why go to a dial and take the risk?

Mfg have gone to buttons and other forms of shifter but they always go back to stick and column.

i guess it is hard to change habits from 100 years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, hyperv6 said:

The problem I surmise may be the dial is different. 

People tend to use shifters without any thought but the dial at first needs more attention and is more an opperator error.

The problem is even as a operator issue the mfg pats the price. 

My puzzlement is why go to a dial and take the risk?

Mfg have gone to buttons and other forms of shifter but they always go back to stick and column.

i guess it is hard to change habits from 100 years.

The problem I surmise may be the dial is different. 

People tend to use shifters without any thought but the dial at first needs more attention and is more an opperator error.

The problem is even as a operator issue the mfg pats the price. 

My puzzlement is why go to a dial and take the risk?

Mfg have gone to buttons and other forms of shifter but they always go back to stick and column.

i guess it is hard to change habits from 100 years.

The shift is because it puts less clutter on the center console and offers more rooms.  you couldn't do such before shifters went electronic.  Jag and Ford (at least on the 17 Fusion) both the dial and Lincoln uses push buttons (at least on the MKS). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its a cleaner look that is for sure. Dials that is.

Ive driven both the TLX and the new 2017 Fusion both with the dial shifters in which I own the previous models where my wife's 2013 Fusion and my 2012 TL have the regular stick.

OK...I personally prefer the clean look and the less claustrophobic reality at the center console but....when the actual shifting out of gear is concerned , I much prefer the old skool way with the stick...

To boot, if I wanted a real clean and waaaay less claustrophobic look at the middle, I much prefer to have a bench seat with an arm rest folding down and up and a column shifter. REAL old skool way!!!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Stew said:

The shift is because it puts less clutter on the center console and offers more rooms.  you couldn't do such before shifters went electronic.  Jag and Ford (at least on the 17 Fusion) both the dial and Lincoln uses push buttons (at least on the MKS). 

 

3 hours ago, Stew said:

The shift is because it puts less clutter on the center console and offers more rooms.  you couldn't do such before shifters went electronic.  Jag and Ford (at least on the 17 Fusion) both the dial and Lincoln uses push buttons (at least on the MKS). 

 Understand this what I do not understand is it worth the risk as you too often end up with issues like this as people really don't deal with changes like this well. 

The space is not worth the issues.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

    • By William Maley
      When the EPA and NHTSA unveiled the proposal for revised fuel economy standards, there was a key part that brought up a lot of debate: The claim that the new regulations would reduce the number of fatalities and crashes. As we pointed out in our story, there were a number of holes in that argument. It seems we were not the only ones questioning this.
      Yesterday, the review of the proposal done by the White House's Information and Regulatory Affairs was made public. In it are hundred of pages of correspondence, analysis, and drafts. Bloomberg went through the documents and found that EPA officials were questioning the rationale put forth by NHTSA on reducing crashes.
      The “proposed standards are detrimental to safety, rather than beneficial,” wrote EPA staff in a memo dated June 18th.
      Their basis for this was analysis done by the agency after making a number of corrections to a Transportation Department model. It showed that freezing fuel economy standards "would lead to an increase in traffic fatalities and boost the overall fatality rate."
      The EPA questioned the validity of the Obama administration standards “coincided with an increase in highway fatalities” claim.
      “What data supports the implication that the standards to date have led to fatality increases?” said the EPA in feedback on June 29th.
      Also, the EPA questioned NHTSA's model that overestimates the number of old and unsafe vehicles on the road if the new regulations go into effect.
      How the EPA and NHTSA came to an agreement is unclear at the moment. What it does reveal is that the dispute between the two agencies could affect plans to try and create a comprise that would appease both automakers and California regulators.
      “These emails are but a fraction of the robust dialogue that occurred during interagency deliberations for the proposed rule. EPA is currently soliciting comments on eight different alternative standards and we look forward to reviewing any new data and information,” said EPA spokesman John Konkus.
      Irene Gutierrez, an attorney with the Natural Resources Defense Council sees it a bit differently.
      "...that even the EPA had deep reservations about the bogus safety arguments being pushed by the Department of Transportation. We know that automakers can make cars both more fuel efficient and safer; it’s heartening to find out EPA’s technical experts agree.”
      Source: Bloomberg

      View full article
    • By William Maley
      When the EPA and NHTSA unveiled the proposal for revised fuel economy standards, there was a key part that brought up a lot of debate: The claim that the new regulations would reduce the number of fatalities and crashes. As we pointed out in our story, there were a number of holes in that argument. It seems we were not the only ones questioning this.
      Yesterday, the review of the proposal done by the White House's Information and Regulatory Affairs was made public. In it are hundred of pages of correspondence, analysis, and drafts. Bloomberg went through the documents and found that EPA officials were questioning the rationale put forth by NHTSA on reducing crashes.
      The “proposed standards are detrimental to safety, rather than beneficial,” wrote EPA staff in a memo dated June 18th.
      Their basis for this was analysis done by the agency after making a number of corrections to a Transportation Department model. It showed that freezing fuel economy standards "would lead to an increase in traffic fatalities and boost the overall fatality rate."
      The EPA questioned the validity of the Obama administration standards “coincided with an increase in highway fatalities” claim.
      “What data supports the implication that the standards to date have led to fatality increases?” said the EPA in feedback on June 29th.
      Also, the EPA questioned NHTSA's model that overestimates the number of old and unsafe vehicles on the road if the new regulations go into effect.
      How the EPA and NHTSA came to an agreement is unclear at the moment. What it does reveal is that the dispute between the two agencies could affect plans to try and create a comprise that would appease both automakers and California regulators.
      “These emails are but a fraction of the robust dialogue that occurred during interagency deliberations for the proposed rule. EPA is currently soliciting comments on eight different alternative standards and we look forward to reviewing any new data and information,” said EPA spokesman John Konkus.
      Irene Gutierrez, an attorney with the Natural Resources Defense Council sees it a bit differently.
      "...that even the EPA had deep reservations about the bogus safety arguments being pushed by the Department of Transportation. We know that automakers can make cars both more fuel efficient and safer; it’s heartening to find out EPA’s technical experts agree.”
      Source: Bloomberg
    • By William Maley
      Fiat Chrysler Automobiles is none too pleased with the Indian automaker Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd as they're planning to sell an off-road vehicle that looks very much like the original Willys Jeep.
      Bloomberg obtained a complaint filed by FCA to the U.S. International Trade Commission on August 1st. The document claims that Mahindra's Roxor infringes key characteristics of Jeep's signature design - namely the “boxy body shape with flat-appearing vertical sides and rear body ending at about the same height as the hood.”
      “They are a nearly identical copy of the iconic Jeep design. In fact, the accused product was ‘modeled after the original Willys Jeep."
      The Roxor is a small, two-seat off-road vehicle. There is a lot of resemblance to original Jeep design and there is a reason for that. Beginning in 1947, Mahindra got a license to build the Willys CJ3 for the Asian market. They would do so until 2010. At this point, Mahindra introduced an updated model known as the Thar that meets India's road going passenger vehicle standards and looks like a 1990's Wrangler.
      Now the Roxor isn't being sold as road-legal vehicle. Instead, Mahindra is selling this as a side-by-side off-road utility. That means its not road legal. Which brings us to the next key part of FCA's complaint. The company is arguing that Roxor imports "threaten it with substantial injury as they are underselling Jeeps." This is due to Mahindra manufacturing the parts and creating a knock-down kit, which is then shipped to a plant in the Detroit area for final assembly. We're not sure about this partly due to the arena the Roxor competes in, but also the price. The model begins at just under $15,500. Comparable models from Polaris and Honda begin at under $10,000.
      While Mahindra has had some success in the U.S. with tractors, they haven't had the same when it comes to automobiles. Previously, the company was planning to offer a diesel pickup through a distributor. But plans were scrapped and Mahindra would find itself in a lengthy court battle. The Roxor is the next attempt at possible entry for Mahindra to enter the automotive market. They have spent almost a quarter-billion dollars for a new assembly plant where they currently employ around 300 people. Last November, the company announced a $600 investment and plans to employ as many as 670 workers by 2020.
      Source: Bloomberg

      View full article
    • By William Maley
      Fiat Chrysler Automobiles is none too pleased with the Indian automaker Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd as they're planning to sell an off-road vehicle that looks very much like the original Willys Jeep.
      Bloomberg obtained a complaint filed by FCA to the U.S. International Trade Commission on August 1st. The document claims that Mahindra's Roxor infringes key characteristics of Jeep's signature design - namely the “boxy body shape with flat-appearing vertical sides and rear body ending at about the same height as the hood.”
      “They are a nearly identical copy of the iconic Jeep design. In fact, the accused product was ‘modeled after the original Willys Jeep."
      The Roxor is a small, two-seat off-road vehicle. There is a lot of resemblance to original Jeep design and there is a reason for that. Beginning in 1947, Mahindra got a license to build the Willys CJ3 for the Asian market. They would do so until 2010. At this point, Mahindra introduced an updated model known as the Thar that meets India's road going passenger vehicle standards and looks like a 1990's Wrangler.
      Now the Roxor isn't being sold as road-legal vehicle. Instead, Mahindra is selling this as a side-by-side off-road utility. That means its not road legal. Which brings us to the next key part of FCA's complaint. The company is arguing that Roxor imports "threaten it with substantial injury as they are underselling Jeeps." This is due to Mahindra manufacturing the parts and creating a knock-down kit, which is then shipped to a plant in the Detroit area for final assembly. We're not sure about this partly due to the arena the Roxor competes in, but also the price. The model begins at just under $15,500. Comparable models from Polaris and Honda begin at under $10,000.
      While Mahindra has had some success in the U.S. with tractors, they haven't had the same when it comes to automobiles. Previously, the company was planning to offer a diesel pickup through a distributor. But plans were scrapped and Mahindra would find itself in a lengthy court battle. The Roxor is the next attempt at possible entry for Mahindra to enter the automotive market. They have spent almost a quarter-billion dollars for a new assembly plant where they currently employ around 300 people. Last November, the company announced a $600 investment and plans to employ as many as 670 workers by 2020.
      Source: Bloomberg
    • By William Maley
      Sergio Marchionne, the former head of Fiat Chrysler Automobiles who is credited for saving Chrysler and Fiat has passed away today at age 66 due to complications from shoulder surgery. 
      “Unfortunately, what we feared has come to pass. Sergio Marchionne, man and friend, is gone,” said FCA Chairman John Elkann in a statement this morning.
      Marchionne came into the spotlight back in 2004 when he was named CEO of Fiat. He was Fiat's fifth CEO in less than two years and had a big task ahead of him. The Italian automaker was struggling as it had lost more than 6 billion Euros (about $7 billion) the year before. Marchionne was somehow able to pull Fiat from the brink by closing various plants, laying off thousand of workers, getting a $2 billion payment from General Motors to settle past contractual obligation, and expanding the company's car lineup. It worked as Fiat would become profitable a year later.
      In 2009, Marchionne led Fiat to acquire a 20 percent stake into beleaguered Chrysler following the 2008 financial crisis. Only a few years later, Fiat would buy up the rest of Chrysler and become Fiat Chrysler Automobiles. He would oversee the reinvention of Alfa Romeo, expand Jeep into other markets, and spin off Ferrari into its own separate company. Other parts of FCA haven't quite worked out, most notably Chrysler and Dodge which has seen both of their lineups shrink.
      Marchionne was not like your normal CEO. He was known for wearing black pullover sweaters and jeans which made him stand out at various events. Marchionne was also known for being direct and speaking his mind (for better or worse).
      Next April, Marchionne was planning to step down as CEO and announce his replacement. But health complications over the weekend caused FCA to decide his successor. That person would be Mike Manley, head of Jeep and Ram Trucks.
      Source: Automotive News (Subscription Required), Bloomberg, Fiat Chrysler Automobiles

      View full article
  • My Clubs

  • Recently Browsing

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Reader Rides

About us

CheersandGears.com - Founded 2001

We ♥ Cars

Get in touch

Follow us

Recent tweets

facebook

×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.