Ram Hemi hydraulic lifter failure...oil related?

Messages
46
Location
Sumter, SC
Quote
So you went against engineers and redesigned engine with eliminated PCM program then used a heavier (although slightly) oil than recommended and it prematurely failed. HMM Nowhere did you state block was checked or spring pressure. Sounds like parts thrown at it and hoping for the best. Sorry it didn't work out
Oh yea...as if the "engineers" are the experts. confused Your engineers do not have very much credibility. The only real reason why Chrysler continues to have sales is because they are the only ones that will finance someone with less than perfect credit, AND because their trucks and SUV's are much cheaper than the others. I know the Hemi has a great deal of horse power. But any mechanic (such as myself with over 30 years experience) knows that you cannot build a high performance engine and expect it to be reliable with a loose valve train, low oil viscosity, and cheaply manufactured parts. Those lifters are a horrible design. Perhaps if they stopped building them in Mexico (or China) and allow the expert machinists in America to design/build them, they wouldn't fail so soon; unless of course that is the real intention. I love it when online trolls try so hard to protect Chrysler when the real numbers are those who see first hand the vast amount of mopar failures around them. I've got four friends who have lost their Hemi's over the same issue. And no it was not oil neglect as Chrysler loves to tout. All four of my buddies are also mechanics (both aircraft and automobile), and yet all of them have have had to endure these numerous Hemi-failures due to poorly designed lifters, and an engine that does not lubricate the upper half of the valve train system very well..Put it to you like this. On my chevy engine, if I remove the valve cover and start the engine, oil squirts out of the push-rods to lubricate the spring caps. But on the hemi engine, I could pull the valve covers and start the engine, and BARELY notice any real oil flow on top of the head. The springs are always mostly dry (with a tiny bit of oil hitting the rollers rockers). Such a trashy built engine and poor design. Your engineers should be ashamed of themselves. If you like Dodge, then stick with it. But don't criticize victims of a poorly design engine from a less-than noble industry. Dodge sucks....get used to it. Joe
 
Last edited:
Messages
46
Location
Sumter, SC
Quote
Joseph, nice to hear from you again, it's unfortunate that it appears that it may be under less than great circumstances however. If indeed the issue has returned, I think we can safely conclude that you've confirmed that it has nothing to do with the MDS, since you no longer have it. What kind of prep/clean-up did you do on the lifter bores that had the damaged lifters in them if you don't mind me asking?
I mic-checked the bore on all the lifter bores, and did not notice any differences indicating wall-gouging or out-or-roundness. I don't recall right off hand the width, but the bores that had lifter failure did not seem to suggest any looseness or side-to-side play.
Quote
That doesn't make sense though, as there are millions of these vehicles/engines out there that don't experience the issue over their lifetime. Also, the multiple updates to the lifter part #'s certainly indicates that FCA is aware of isolated failures and working with the supplier to try and eliminate the issue.
I understand that Chrysler may be trying to solve the problem (finally) because they are losing their reputation, and thus customers. More and more people are scared as [censored] of buying a Mopar product due to their unreliability. All automotive manufacturers should set the same goals as Toyota does; always aim for 100% percent fail rate, and not like Chrysler who seems to accept a less than 90% percent fail rate, and all in the name of saving money. Setting high standards for vehicle reliability, economy, and safety is a must if any automotive manufacturer expects to garner the same reputation as Toyota. I know a man in Atlanta GA who owned a Toyota Tacoma with over 1,000,000 miles, and Toyota bought his truck back, and gave him a new one at a much lower cost. I've seen a few GM 3500 HD's with over 600,000 miles on it and still going (diesel of course). And I have seen a few Mopar vehicles with over 300,000 miles (A Chrysler 300 with a 2006 Hemi), but most of the Hemi's I know in my town with over 120,000 miles have all had lifter/chamshaft failures (2010's and up). Chrysler needs to invest in research and development before selling a product, instead of using customers as the test subjects. The only real reason why the top-3 in America have not been put out of business yet is because the Feds will not allow Toyota to import their new line of trucks with the cummin's diesel engine. I was waiting for Toyota to import those into the US. But the EPA lied about them and claims that their diesels do not satisfy fuel efficiency standards...as if Dodge does. My Hemi before and after the MDS delete still only averages about 15mpg.
Quote
Yes, that's my position as well, that it is lifter related, just like with the GM AFM engines. Whether it's exclusive to the lifters themselves, or there is a trigger like weak valve springs and valve float? Would be interesting to know.
I should have checked the valve springs before reassembly, but did not think that to be the problem. Now I'm quite curios if the valve train was designed loose in order to reduce engine loads that would lead to lower fuel efficiency standards. Perhaps the valve springs are not strong enough, which may be allowing the lifters to hop and skip atop of the cam lobe, which would damage the rollers and thus lead to failure....interesting idea. Joe
 
Messages
46
Location
Sumter, SC
UPDATE: Okay so I jumped the gun and assumed I had a return lifter problem. It turns out that the Bank 2 lower roller/rocker rail was broke on the #8 cylinder (I believe the exhaust lifter). I'm not sure why, but the rocker rail keeper (what ever you call it) will break and allow the rail to slide back and forth; this created a tapping sound. I had to replace the upper intake rocker/rail last year during the repair. This time the rocker/rail for the exhaust valves had to be replace because #8 was sliding back and forth. Those rails are not cheap either....about $180 bucks. Tapping sound gone! Thank goodness it was not another lifter issue! Joe
 
Last edited:
Messages
43,081
Location
Ontario, Canada
Originally Posted by JosephA
UPDATE: Okay so I jumped the gun and assumed I had a return lifter problem. It turns out that the Bank 2 lower roller/rocker rail was broke on the #8 cylinder (I believe the exhaust lifter). I'm not sure why, but the rocker rail keeper (what ever you call it) will break and allow the rail to slide back and forth; this created a tapping sound. I had to replace the upper intake rocker/rail last year during the repair. This time the rocker/rail for the exhaust valves had to be replace because #8 was sliding back and forth. Those rails are not cheap either....about $180 bucks. Tapping sound gone! Thank goodness it was not another lifter issue! Joe
Great to hear! Can you post up a picture of the failed part? I'm curious to see it.
 
Messages
15
Location
oh

some updated info, Uncle Tony couldnt even find the oil galleys? he mentions them as hampering oiling? Oil doesnt splash up from the crank at all...
 
Messages
2,900
Location
Chicagoland

some updated info, Uncle Tony couldnt even find the oil galleys? he mentions them as hampering oiling? Oil doesnt splash up from the crank at all...
This does make more sense than Tony’s video. Time will tell for later models with the updated lifters, but my trucks 5.7 seems less “clattery” than what my 2011 Durango was... but that could be the difference between 105k miles and 4,300.
 
Messages
435
Location
Kevil,Ky
My wife had a Plymouth Breeze that had noisy lifter. Tried the usual and noting worked. Bought a bottle of lifter lube from NAPA and after second bottle the noise left and never returned. I'm a believer. Usual remedies are B12, SeaFoam,MM in that order.
 
Messages
392
Location
Kansas
I had a 2004 SLT just before they started using MDS. I had no problems with the HEMI, but I have heard so many stories of lifter failures and cam shaft issues on the 5.7 after MDS was implemented. It is an issue IMO; unfortunately not one that I believe you will have much recourse for. All I can say is don't buy Mopar in the future; that is my plan anyhow.

Also, I will just mention that even my HEMI had the infamous "tick". It would only go away after a fresh oil change, so I have a hard time believing it had anything to do with the exhaust manifold. It would always return around 3K. I never worried much about the "tick". I changed the oil every 5k. It made it to 100k until last November when I sold it and bought a Tundra. The engine was still running strong, but the electronics of the truck were going haywire. I did have to have the entire tranny replaced (under warranty) at 60K in 2009 I think. FCA did replace it without batting an eye.
 
Last edited:
Messages
15
Location
oh
I am leaning more and more to 1. Bad lifters (very rare) and 2. MDS/VVT (more aggressive lift) impact causing problems when thing go wonky...

IF YOU HAVE A 6.4 failure WATCH this...
 
Messages
15
Location
oh
He did a hemi lifter break down... Not many changes but they did beef up the needle bearings once they went more aggressive lift(expected)...
 
Top