Cracked Exhaust? Really?

[SpookyWatcher]

Nobody is defending it in the thread.

The difference in reactions is you are in full spaz drama mode, and others are not.

Now hyperbolic attacks. Straight out of woke playbook. Nowhere did I see the OP "spaz in drama mode". Get a freaking grip

Koolies are gonna Koolie...

 

[1D32319]

Wait, what? Cast manifolds wear out?
No, they don't. Are you frigging kidding me?

It's hard for a non moving part which should suffer from any erosion to "wear out".

Now put metal with defects in it through a bunch of heat cycles and it may break.

 

[1D32319]

Now hyperbolic attacks. Straight out of woke playbook. Nowhere did I see the OP "spaz in drama mode".

Koolies are gonna Koolie...

You're talking to the wrong guy if you think I'm woke or using woke ********.

OP is straight up standing naked on his front lawn scrificing chickens, antelops, and panda bears while drinking ouzo spazzing out because he isn't getting the same lockstep reactions from every poster here. He may have seen more reasonable responses throughout if he didn't attack everyone who had a higher tolerance for vehicle issues.

 

[SpookyWatcher]

You're talking to the wrong guy if you think I'm woke or using woke ********.

OP is straight up standing naked on his front lawn scrificing chickens, antelops, and panda bears while drinking ouzo spazzing out because he isn't getting the same lockstep reactions from every poster here. He may have seen more reasonable responses throughout if he didn't attack everyone who had a higher tolerance for vehicle issues.

Uh.... Here's your mirror.

Read what you woke... eh...I mean wrote... real carefully.

 

[Neurobit]

It's hard for a non moving part which should suffer from any erosion to "wear out".

Now put metal with defects in it through a bunch of heat cycles and it may break.

100%. A properly designed part should not be exhibiting these failures. They need to either revisit the design, or use better raw materials for the castings.

 

[jdmartin]

@dn325ci I never said I was ok with it, just said it's more common than you think. Just because you've never experienced it doesn't mean it doesn't happen quite often.

I've never owned a Euro car solely from the horror stories I've heard from family members' vehicles. Mercedes, VW, BMW, you name it. Despite what you're saying, manifolds are an item that can and will wear out. Should they have failed at 60k miles? They shouldn't have, and I definitely agree with you on that. But you are part of a tiny subset of hundreds of thousands of 5th gen's that have been sold. Sh!t happens, man.

I love the people that get on here and scream because they have an issue with their truck. Do you expect a perfect, maintenance-free vehicle?

LaxDfns15 was over there with me on the Titan boards for many years. Cracked manifolds are a very real thing over there, similar to what seems like a common failure here of rear window frame cracks. If you had a Titan it was not a question of if your manifolds were going to crack, but when. I had two of them and both of them had cracked manifolds; the second one, which I had until I traded it in on the Ram and drove it up to 160k miles or so, got the first set replaced under warranty (barely, I was at like 78k miles) with the "redesigned" manifold that was nothing more than a small piece of metal welded between collectors 3 & 4, and both replacement manifolds eventually cracked. At least on the Ram it looks like the manifold is cast iron - on the Titan it was stamped steel! Maybe the manifold isn't built as sturdy on the Ram as it could/should be. That's part of owning anything these days; unless you design it and build it yourself, you have no idea how well it's built or who built it.

I get that the OP is unhappy about an expensive repair that close in, though it sounds like FCA (Stellantis?) did him right by giving him a $1500 credit or something like that. But miles and warranties are just that. They give you (well, you pay for it) a 3/36 on everything and a 5/60 on the drivetrain. Ram is telling you on the front end that if something breaks outside those limits, you as the owner are responsible for paying for it. They sell extended warranties, which are expensive but also cover more years and miles. Most people rather pocket the money and take the gamble that nothing is going to go wrong. Then, when something breaks outside the warranty that "shouldn't have", they cry, yell, stomp their feet, kick rocks and generally make themselves unhappy, when they had the opportunity when they bought the truck (and judging from the number of calls I get, for many miles afterwards) to pay some extra money and be covered longer.

The OP is not a victim of any dastardly scheme, as much as he may prefer to believe he is. And people who don't get on the pity train are not apologists, they're realists. You can cry the blues all you want and at the end of the day you still have a broke truck, or a fixed truck and a bill. Why make yourself miserable with "This is how it should be" sentiments? Just sell the damned truck and get something high-quality that fits your needs. Why come on boards to regale the members with Tales Of Woe? I bet there would be a lot more "Hey man that sucks get FCA to pay for it" posts if the OP just accepted their role in the whole matter (they didn't buy an extended warranty) and just posted up their situation and how it ended.

This is the problem in America today. Everyone is a victim. The OP is a victim of Evil Corporations and Lazy Engineers and Terrible Quality Controllers. I don't know how anyone sleeps at night

 

[LaxDfns15]

I'm also an engineer by degree(s) and trade. Doesn't mean things don't fail. There is no manufacture process that is 100% perfect. Period. It's impossible. That's not hyperbole, that's fact. You all saying "A pRoPeR pArT sHuD b PeRfEcT" need to get a grip on reality. Real world the failure rate on manifolds is probably under 1%.

I said "wear out" to not overly complicate it, but I can say cast manifolds "will compress and contract with every heat cycle eventually leading to failure. Even a small amount of impurities can cause weak material properties, allowing micro fractures to occur, which will eventually lead to failure" but you know what? "Wear out" covers that just as easily.

 

[dn325ci]

I'm also an engineer by degree(s) and trade. Doesn't mean things don't fail. There is no manufacture process that is 100% perfect. Period. It's impossible. That's not hyperbole, that's fact. You all saying "A pRoPeR pArT sHuD b PeRfEcT" need to get a grip on reality. Real world the failure rate on manifolds is probably under 1%.

I said "wear out" to not overly complicate it, but I can say cast manifolds "will compress and contract with every heat cycle eventually leading to failure. Even a small amount of impurities can cause weak material properties, allowing micro fractures to occur, which will eventually lead to failure" but you know what? "Wear out" covers that just as easily.

Again, an extreme response. Everyone knows nothing is ever 100%, so you belabor an undisputed point here and previously. The point was is should be very rare, and indeed it is in much of the automotive world. Here it is more prevalent. I don't accept for a moment it needs to be. It is easily solvable with proper design.

 

[LaxDfns15]

Again, an extreme response. Everyone knows nothing is ever 100%, so you belabor an undisputed point here and previously. The point was is should be very rare, and indeed it is in much of the automotive world. Here it is more prevalent. I don't accept for a moment it needs to be. It is easily solvable with proper design.

That's so easy to say. So in a few batches of material out of thousands for the manifolds you get enough impurities to cause failures down the road. It's not caught at the manufacturer because the part is built correctly, and the sample testing passed. It's not caught at the factory because the manufacturer said it's good to go, so now you have potentially thousands of trucks with these bad manifolds. Please tell me how it's easily solvable to correct a failure rate that's so low. I'd love to hear it so we can implement it in our process at work.

This specific issue IS very rare, even in the Ram world. Which is why FCA didn't automatically cave and say "You know what, it's a prevalent issue, we'll fix it for free." You're on a forum where the predominant thing to do is 1. ask "What's the biggest tire I can fit on X truck?" and 2. complain about any and all issues you have with the truck. So of course you're going to hear about it more here than anywhere else.

 

[dn325ci]

That's so easy to say. So in a few batches of material out of thousands for the manifolds you get enough impurities to cause failures down the road. It's not caught at the manufacturer because the part is built correctly, and the sample testing passed. It's not caught at the factory because the manufacturer said it's good to go, so now you have potentially thousands of trucks with these bad manifolds. Please tell me how it's easily solvable to correct a failure rate that's so low. I'd love to hear it so we can implement it in our process at work.

This specific issue IS very rare, even in the Ram world. Which is why FCA didn't automatically cave and say "You know what, it's a prevalent issue, we'll fix it for free." You're on a forum where the predominant thing to do is 1. ask "What's the biggest tire I can fit on X truck?" and 2. complain about any and all issues you have with the truck. So of course you're going to hear about it more here than anywhere else.

Easy. Cast iron as a material for casting is made in batches. You specify the proper cast iron for the job, as there are many classes and microstructures. You specify the inclusions your design will allow. Whenever a batch is made, you also pour a sample for quality assurance and check it. Some call this quality control. I'm available for hire. PM me. What's easy to say is "nothing is ever 100%". Lazy even. You've seen how many reports there are here and across the internet. Stop excusing the easy way out.

 

[LaxDfns15]

Easy. Cast iron as a material for casting is made in batches. You specify the proper cast iron for the job, as there are many classes and microstructures. You specify the inclusions your design will allow. Whenever a batch is made, you also pour a sample for quality assurance and check it. Some call this quality control. I'm available for hire. PM me. What's easy to say is "nothing is ever 100%". Lazy even. You've seen how many reports there are here and across the internet. Stop excusing the easy way out.

Exactly, you specify the amount of inclusions. So if your cast iron isn't pure, you WILL have failures. You quality check that sample, which I talked about, and that sample checks out. Perfect. So out of a batch of 100 parts you sample 1 and it passes. If a different 2 parts of the 100 fail you're at 2% failure rate which is most likely high for a real world failure rate. You're acting like this wasn't done and every manifold is failing. Please give me an example of a real world item that is 100% infallible every batch.

So are you allowed to have impurities? If not, that means the cost of this truck is above the point where people will buy them. There's a point at which the largest risk in a design process is the product not being bought. That's why certain small failure amounts are allowed.

 

[dn325ci]

Exactly, you specify the amount of inclusions. So if your cast iron isn't pure, you WILL have failures. You quality check that sample, which I talked about, and that sample checks out. Perfect. So out of a batch of 100 parts you sample 1 and it passes. If a different 2 parts of the 100 fail you're at 2% failure rate which is most likely high for a real world failure rate. You're acting like this wasn't done and every manifold is failing. Please give me an example of a real world item that is 100% infallible every batch.

So are you allowed to have impurities? If not, that means the cost of this truck is above the point where people will buy them. There's a point at which the largest risk in a design process is the product not being bought. That's why certain small failure amounts are allowed.

OK, it's obvious to me now that you have no idea what you're talking about. Good casting design and manufacturing processes solves this. 2% is appalling and never should make it to the field. By your logic, you'd also be fine with 2% of engine blocks failing, 2% of head castings failing, 2% of crankshafts failing, 2% of every connecting rod failing, 2% of camshafts failing. By the time you stack up all your 2% probabilities, there is 100% probability of a major problem. If there is 2% fallout in the process, you make darn sure you catch it at the factory and not in the field. It's expensive for everybody in the field. Please tell me you're not working in a manufacturing process. If you are, please tell me for what product so I can be sure not to buy one. Plus your back to your bizarre 100% point which no high school statistics student ever disagreed with. My grandfather often told me to never argue with someone you have to educate first - I should have listened.

 

[LaxDfns15]

OK, it's obvious to me now that you have no idea what you're talking about. Good casting design and manufacturing processes solves this. 2% is appalling and never should make it to the field. By your logic, you'd also be fine with 2% of engine blocks failing, 2% of head castings failing, 2% of crankshafts failing, 2% of every connecting rod failing, 2% of camshafts failing. By the time you stack up all your 2% probabilities, there is 100% probability of a major problem. If there is 2% fallout in the process, you make darn sure you catch it at the factory and not in the field. It's expensive for everybody in the field. Please tell me you're not working in a manufacturing process. If you are, please tell me for what product so I can be sure not to buy one. Plus your back to your bizarre 100% point which no high school statistics student ever disagreed with. My grandfather often told me to never argue with someone you have to educate first - I should have listened.

Yep, listen to your grandfather. So many comments in this thread alone, including you, expecting perfect parts every time. What that's saying about insanity?

 

[jdmartin]

For my part, I still don't understand how all the griping solves anything. Even if the casting process is flawed. Even if the failure rate is 2% and that's appalling. Even if LaxDfns15 doesn't understand statistics (since we're both tt alumni I can give you hell }. Even if all of that is true, what is the point? That the Ram is a POS and you never should have bought it? Doesn't that mean you should have done more research before buying one? If someone swindles someone else out of their money - which is what this entire thread sounds like to me - who's the dummy, the swindler or the guy who got swindled? Personally, I'd rather think that FCA is trying to sell a good product by and large and that sometimes **** is going to happen, than to think that I'm a complete moron who bought a piece of crap truck because I wasn't willing to do enough research or learn enough about the exhaust manifold casting process and quality control program to realize that the manifolds were going to fail on 2% of the trucks in 70k miles.

You know, in life you either have control and charge of your life, and you get to set the way things happen, or you're a hapless victim just getting ****-punched by every hooligan out there. It's your choice

 

[dn325ci]

Now hyperbolic attacks. Straight out of woke playbook. Nowhere did I see the OP "spaz in drama mode". Get a freaking grip

Koolies are gonna Koolie...

You were right. Cheers.

 

[SpookyWatcher]

You were right. Cheers.

Yup. They certainly are predictable. Comical... No.. Pathetic.

 

[silver billet]

Some of you are arguing as if cost doesn't enter the equation. I'm not an auto engineer so I can't tell what is normal, but I can tell you that cost goes with quality and reliablity.

Now remember that all trucks exhibit their own common problems. For the Ram it might be the rear window and manifold and lifters. For the GM it's rear window and their cylinder deactivation etc. For the Ford they will have their own issues (ecobooms). Go to any car enthusiasts forum and try to see if you are unable to find this exact mindset there; guaranteed, you will: it cost me X it shouldn't break. Story of literally ever car out there. Even Nasa screws up occasionally whose standards far exceed anybody in the auto industry.

Do you think other brands don't have garages? They don't have warranties to cover defects and "stuff that shouldn't break"? Toyota's garages are only doing oil changes and brake jobs, right?

You cannot expect a perfect truck at the prices we pay. Even toyota costs big money, and they only have their reliability reputation because they're still selling a brand new truck designed in 1955. <--- wee little joke.

 

[BowDown]

100%. A properly designed part should not be exhibiting these failures. They need to either revisit the design, or use better raw materials for the castings.

Disagree, could have been a bad batch from the vender, bad metal from the foundry or something in the casting in that spot.
My previous Ram had 277K on it and never had a manifold issue

 

[BowDown]

Again, an extreme response. Everyone knows nothing is ever 100%, so you belabor an undisputed point here and previously. The point was is should be very rare, and indeed it is in much of the automotive world. Here it is more prevalent. I don't accept for a moment it needs to be. It is easily solvable with proper design.

You don't think this is a rare occurrence? 1.5MM+ trucks not to mention cars and this few of failures? It is rare and a proper design, if it were an improper design you'd have way more failures than what's being reported. Its a cast exhaust manifold, not a cylinder head or even a rocker arm

 

[silver billet]

Once again... They just can't help themselves.

Here we go with hyperbolic absurdity arguement. Straight up predictable. No one anywhere has said they expect a perfect truck. As you stated EVERY truck/car has it's idiosyncrasies. And it's not absurd to point out deficiencies in ANY vehicle in an effort to inform and hope they get sorted. It's in the best interest of the maker and the customer AND the potential buyer.

Your Kooolieness, is in my opinion, Detrimental.

p.s. I Love my truck! I recommend it to Everyone.

It's not absurd at all to point out the problems; what's absurd is some of the reactions to manufacturing problems on this thread.