“Automated” A/C hack - my version

[sticker500]

They'll only incur the cost of ripping dashes apart (and also the pressure of unsatisfied customers) if people bring their trucks into the service department instead of making home remedies to fix the issue...

Nobody has had a dash ripped apart because FCA has yet to issue a bulletin instructing dealers to do it. So your statement will have some validation when the repair is skipped because of a clamp or valve.

I would venture to say the majority of folks who have performed this have well documented concerns with dealers regarding A/C and this is a stop gap.

 

[riccnick]

Nobody has had a dash ripped apart because FCA has yet to issue a bulletin instructing dealers to do it. So your statement will have some validation when the repair is skipped because of a clamp or valve.

I would venture to say the majority of folks who have performed this have well documented concerns with dealers regarding A/C and this is a stop gap.

I honestly don't know the numbers, but if I had to guess, a large majority did not bring their trucks in after all the attention this is getting on the forums. We have to have ten threads about the A/C now, and the discussion has moved away from finding the root cause of the problem, to just convincing people to do the mod and measure vent temps out of context.

There doesn't have to be a bulletin. There has to be one diagnose and report that says "blend door does not function as designed", "blend door does not repeat position", "blend door does not seal against heater box", or "thermal contamination in air ducts under dash pad". All that needs to happen is a tech needs to find the issue, the service writer needs to order parts, and the warranty department needs to approve the repairs. A couple of those same diagnose and reports and there will be a cause for a STAR case, then a TSB, and then if necessary, a recall, if deemed a safety hazard. It all starts with the service department though. Can't pressure FCA to fix it my stomping our feet on a forum... Think about the squealing brakes TSB. It started out as two different STAR cases, purely based off of the number of repeated customer concerns from repeated trips to the dealer. Now there are two TSB's, and one of them is on it's third revision, meaning FCA is further investigating how to best solve the problem.

 

[Neokane]

Long story short... Take your trucks to the dealership. Rinse and repeat until the problem is fix.
Quit McGyver'ing your truck and make FCA fix it like it should be for a new 40-60k truck.

 

[sticker500]

I honestly don't know the numbers, but if I had to guess, a large majority did not bring their trucks in after all the attention this is getting on the forums. We have to have ten threads about the A/C now, and the discussion has moved away from finding the root cause of the problem, to just convincing people to do the mod and measure vent temps out of context.

There doesn't have to be a bulletin. There has to be one diagnose and report that says "blend door does not function as designed", "blend door does not repeat position", "blend door does not seal against heater box", or "thermal contamination in air ducts under dash pad". All that needs to happen is a tech needs to find the issue, the service writer needs to order parts, and the warranty department needs to approve the repairs. A couple of those same diagnose and reports and there will be a cause for a STAR case, then a TSB, and then if necessary, a recall, if deemed a safety hazard. It all starts with the service department though. Can't pressure FCA to fix it my stomping our feet on a forum... Think about the squealing brakes TSB. It started out as two different STAR cases, purely based off of the number of repeated customer concerns from repeated trips to the dealer. Now there are two TSB's, and one of them is on it's third revision, meaning FCA is further investigating how to best solve the problem.

I don't disagree with you one bit about taking it to the dealer and voicing the concerns. Brake squeal that can be heard is a little different than my A/C doesn't get cold enough for me but meets the written specifications. A technician is not going to make a move unless they get paid, and they are calling the tech line for direction. It has already been reported that Star closed a case saying the vent temp difference is as designed.

I think every single person should visit the dealer, call RAM Customer Service, and also post their experience on social media IF they are truly unhappy with the performance of the truck. We certainly need the help from forum members by reporting this to RAM but I support those that are trying to get relief from the inadequacy of the system.

 

[riccnick]

I don't disagree with you one bit about taking it to the dealer and voicing the concerns. Brake squeal that can be heard is a little different than my A/C doesn't get cold enough for me but meets the written specifications. A technician is not going to make a move unless they get paid, and they are calling the tech line for direction. It has already been reported that Star closed a case saying the vent temp difference is as designed.

I think every single person should visit the dealer, call RAM Customer Service, and also post their experience on social media IF they are truly unhappy with the performance of the truck. We certainly need the help from forum members by reporting this to RAM but I support those that are trying to get relief from the inadequacy of the system.

But that's the other half of the problem that I've repeatedly mentioned in these threads. The "adequacy" of the systems performance is subjective, unless you're testing it to FCA's specifications exactly. If your truck meets those performance targets, yet YOU still don't think the system is strong enough, then your expectations are out of line with FCA's. However, I do believe that there are quite a few trucks out there NOT performing to the required specifications, and THOSE trucks need to be tested in order to validate the subjective assumptions.

WE don't get to decide what specs a manufacturer designs and builds its vehicle systems to. They do. And if we don't like it, the market data will show it with poor sales dues to X Y and Z. It's like us complaining that the Hemi doesn't make 600 hp because we saw another 5.7L engine make that much power and it's just unacceptable that FCA would design an engine with less power than that. However, if (in this imaginary scenario) I dyno tested my Hemi and came back with a crank HP calculation in the 200's instead of 395 like it's supposed to be, according to their data of what the engine should put out for power, then I would have a case against them saying my truck is under performing.

 

[sticker500]

But that's the other half of the problem that I've repeatedly mentioned in these threads. The "adequacy" of the systems performance is subjective, unless you're testing it to FCA's specifications exactly. If your truck meets those performance targets, yet YOU still don't think the system is strong enough, then your expectations are out of line with FCA's. However, I do believe that there are quite a few trucks out there NOT performing to the required specifications, and THOSE trucks need to be tested in order to validate the subjective assumptions.

WE don't get to decide what specs a manufacturer designs and builds its vehicle systems to. They do. And if we don't like it, the market data will show it with poor sales dues to X Y and Z. It's like us complaining that the Hemi doesn't make 600 hp because we saw another 5.7L engine make that much power and it's just unacceptable that FCA would design an engine with less power than that. However, if (in this imaginary scenario) I dyno tested my Hemi and came back with a crank HP calculation in the 200's instead of 397 like it's supposed to be, according to their data of what the engine should put out for power, then I would have a case against them saying my truck is under performing.

Understand what you are saying. Continuing to report the inadequacy and vocalizing the concerns hopefully they will make improvements to the design of the truck/specifications and/or find an issue that requires repair. There are people who have made decisions not to buy because of the A/C not performing to what they feel is acceptable. I don't care what the specifications say, I know it does not perform as well as other vehicles I own/owned. If RAM is ok with that and will not improve the situation then I will make my choices in vehicles accordingly. I will continue to share my experience with others.

 

[jloops]

Yeah, I've been in several times. First time I was told AC performs as expected even though they never actually performed a test. Second time they did the software flash TSB, but never performed a test. Third time they said low refrigerant, but didn't know why. Added refrigerant and recharged the system, worked better for a day. Fourth time low refrigerant again, but found a leak in the discharge hose. Replaced hose, added refrigerant and recharged the system.

Yesterday, the fifth time they said the refrigerant level was holding and no leaks found. They tested system with AC temperature on low, fan speed 3 driver vent blowing 48 degrees and passenger 43 degrees. Changed the fan speed to 7 (Max AC), the driver vent temp went up to 55 degrees and passenger to 51 degrees. They said "Difference is the amount of air flow and the length of run for air to travel. Service manager and director verified all information.". Also said those temps are all within specs so AC is working properly.

We're talking about the two vents in the center stack that are 12 inches or less away from each other. Increasing the fan speed makes the temps rise by 7-8 degrees? That contradicts the idea of Max AC (temp low and fan 7) giving you the best cooling. Also, I don't know if all 2019 DT trucks do this (some have said there's does), but when I have mine set on Max AC and switch to Auto the fan blows harder than 7 even though there isn't a setting above 7. IMO none of this sounds like the AC is working properly?

 

[riccnick]

I don't care what the specifications say, I know it does not perform as well as other vehicles I own/owned.

This is where I have the problem, and it's contingent on whether or not you actually ran the test. Comparing it to "other vehicles" is just not an argument that makes sense to me. And it certainly won't get a service department to take anyone seriously.

There's been too many reports of low refrigerant, leaks in the system, improper use, etc etc, for me to take anyone seriously on this "issue" without any data. (I know, I'm not the judge and jury on this issue, I'm just trying to play both sides of the story to stop people painting with too broad of a brush) And the fact that there is a procedure that we know about to specifically evaluate the performance of the HVAC system, and people repeatedly refuse to use it because "they know what cold A/C feels like" just blows my mind. The data from the test could actually point to a fixable problem, yet people just want to soapbox without actually doing anything about it.

Without looking back in this thread, or any of the others, did you run the A/C performance test to see if your vent temps are within spec? Just purely for my curiosity.

 

[sticker500]

This is where I have the problem, and it's contingent on whether or not you actually ran the test. Comparing it to "other vehicles" is just not an argument that makes sense to me. And it certainly won't get a service department to take anyone seriously.

There's been too many reports of low refrigerant, leaks in the system, improper use, etc etc, for me to take anyone seriously on this issue without any data. (I know, I'm not the judge and jury on this issue, I'm just trying to play both sides of the story to stop people painting with too broad of a brush)

Without looking back in this thread, did you run the A/C performance test to see if your vent temps are within spec?

We are going back and forth again, and I totally get your logic BUT I don't care what the specifications say because I believe they are written to provide enough temp variances with ambient temps to protect the manufacturer. I will use use this experience to judge the overall satisfaction of the vehicle. I will use the response from FCA to judge my overall satisfaction of the vehicle and brand.

 

[riccnick]

I totally get your logic

I don't care what the specifications say

Hmmmm, lol

they are written to provide enough temp variances with ambient temps to protect the manufacturer.

Take off the tin foil hat for a sec and hear me out, lol. The only thing it "protects" the manufacturer from is the pitchfork mentality that erupts in every single one of these threads about the A/C. The test specs are part of the service manual, which was written long before anyone could have ever expressed their dislike of the performance of the HVAC system in a DT truck. The specs come from the Engineering team, not from Legal, to provide the service department a gauge on when the HVAC system needs servicing. Systems like the A/C on a vehicle have degrading performance over time, it's just a function of their design, using the technology we have right now. There needs to be some sort of data to tell people when it's time for an overhaul, and subsequently, a problem, if the system doesn't perform to spec within the target lifespan. The specs serve no other function, I promise.

We are going back and forth again

Did we do this in another one of these threads? I honestly don't know, there's too many to keep track of. I don't know if you ran the test, or if you asked the service department to, but you should if you genuinely believe the system is sub par. My truck regularly puts out decent numbers, and not just the max listed in the spec, I've seen vent temps in the 40's like what everyone here cries about. So anyone who says their vent temps aren't good, should be looking for a solution. The solution starts with validating there is a problem.

I'll chill for now, this thread is about automating the hack, so I'll admit I dragged it off topic. The automated part of the hack is cool af. And hopefully the trucks will be too (see what I did there?)

 

[Rob5589]

@jloops, it has been a long time and I was not an "ac guy" but, we always temp checked at lowest setting and mid speed on fan. It is possible, as you found out, to increase air velocity beyond what the system is capable of cooling.

 

[Lize]

@jloops, it has been a long time and I was not an "ac guy" but, we always temp checked at lowest setting and mid speed on fan. It is possible, as you found out, to increase air velocity beyond what the system is capable of cooling.

Thanks for the explanation, makes sense as to why the MAX AC is pretty useless and cooling is better using AUTO or choosing my own preferred settings.

I‘m not worrying about the AC but since the rest of the truck is so good it is a bit disappointing. With our recent good weather in the high 80s I can sympathise with those in hot states.

 

[ldoh]

It wouldn't surprise me if FCA had 2 different a/c performance specs. One for production that's more demanding so FCA remains competitive with other manufacturers. The other spec is for used vehicle repair work with a goal of limiting FCA overhead/operating costs. Of course our trucks have the a/c performance issue upon roll-out from the factory and shouldn't fall under the second category.

The Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) sets automotive standards. I would bet they have a nice document describing minimum a/c performance.

 

[riccnick]

It wouldn't surprise me if FCA had 2 different a/c performance specs. One for production that's more demanding so FCA remains competitive with other manufacturers. The other spec is for used vehicle repair work with a goal of limiting FCA overhead/operating costs. Of course our trucks have the a/c performance issue upon roll-out from the factory and shouldn't fall under the second category.

Take off the tin foil hat. Cmon now, if any manufacturer got caught purposefully falsifying performance data, and selling underperforming vehicles to customers, they'd be in for a world of hurt. Not saying it doesn't happen (Cough, any diesel ever after VW ****ed up, cough), but honestly it's a ton of effort for them to go through this kind of thing. They'd have to go through developing TWO systems and performance metrics, in order to only sell one of them and "save" money by actively screwing customers.

The Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) sets automotive standards. I would bet they have a nice document describing minimum a/c performance.

There's a ton of them. They all seem to refer to safety and environmental standards for system design and functionality. There's one or two that caught my eye, I'll see if I can get my hands on them and look for cooling performance targets.

https://www.macsw.org/WEB/images/Macs_Docs/Resources/SAE%20J%20Standards%20(Revised%20102918).pdf

 

[ldoh]

Take off the tin foil hat. Cmon now, if any manufacturer got caught purposefully falsifying performance data, and selling underperforming vehicles to customers, they'd be in for a world of hurt. Not saying it doesn't happen (Cough, any diesel ever after VW ****ed up, cough), but honestly it's a ton of effort for them to go through this kind of thing. They'd have to go through developing TWO systems and performance metrics, in order to only sell one of them and "save" money by actively screwing customers.

There's a ton of them. They all seem to refer to safety and environmental standards for system design and functionality. There's one or two that caught my eye, I'll see if I can get my hands on them and look for cooling performance targets.

https://www.macsw.org/WEB/images/Macs_Docs/Resources/SAE%20J%20Standards%20(Revised%20102918).pdf

Our economy is based on capitalism where FCA is free to set their own rules so long as human safety and the environment isn't adversely risked. They can live and die with their business model of choice. Two specs isn't falsifying anything as it would be clearly defined. There could be even more than 2 specs: production, warranty period, post warranty period, commercial, retail, military, off-road,....

I tried to grab SAE specs but there's a fee unless one is associated with SAE, a University, etc. I would think it would be a foundational SAE HVAC spec referenced in many peer reviewed HVAC related papers.

 

[ac1dd]

It wouldn't surprise me if FCA had 2 different a/c performance specs. One for production that's more demanding so FCA remains competitive with other manufacturers. The other spec is for used vehicle repair work with a goal of limiting FCA overhead/operating costs. Of course our trucks have the a/c performance issue upon roll-out from the factory and shouldn't fall under the second category.

The Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) sets automotive standards. I would bet they have a nice document describing minimum a/c performance.

This is very likely correct assumption. Chrysler isn't the only car company that subscribes to this way of doing things either. Probably SOP at most main line manufacturers.

 

[riccnick]

Our economy is based on capitalism where FCA is free to set their own rules so long as human safety and the environment isn't adversely risked. They can live and die with their business model of choice. Two specs isn't falsifying anything as it would be clearly defined. There could be even more than 2 specs: production, warranty period, post warranty period, commercial, retail, military, off-road,....

I tried to grab SAE specs but there's a fee unless one is associated with SAE, a University, etc. I would think it would be a foundational SAE HVAC spec referenced in many peer reviewed HVAC related papers.

I agree, however, there are more rules to capitalism than just human safety and environmental. Somewhere along the line, there were a few consumer protection laws added in as well. And regardless, we have access to the theoretical "second" set of specs, and plenty of trucks still perform to it, and plenty of trucks don't, so the point is moot. Those of us who have better performing A/C seem to also fall into the spec's, and those who "don't" either haven't tested, or have tested and had leaks, repairs, or flashes solve their problems. There has only been one or two cases of people testing (and testing properly) where they fall outside the spec's listed.

I couldn't get the spec's either (without paying), I used to have access to them with a work subscription, but that was many moons ago, and I can't remember the login info lol. (probably inactive anyway)

 

[Moparluver]

The argument that we all need to line up at the dealer so that they know the magnitude of the problem is silly. Y'all are welcome to do that, but I don't have time to drop off my truck to "complain". I'm interested in A/C that blows cold. I've accomplished that. Their test spec of what's acceptable fully outlines the problem. They will decide weather or not they wish to fix the issue. I will say that if they don't fix it, I may be looking at a different brand for my next purchase.