2020 Jeep Gladiator – Camshaft Failure AGAIN After Recall Fix. No Response from Jeep. VIN: 1C6HJTFG8LL131631

[DiehardTory]

Goodwill is requested by the dealership service manager to the Service & Parts district manager responsible for warranty and service issues for that dealership. These managers are provided guidance by the Warranty manager at the Business Center. Given the timing of your situation and the July 4th holiday, coupled with earned PTO; it is feasible that the mgr is not available for consultation. NOW Here is the Jeep National Customer Service contact number, Call an register your issue and request:

Customer service = Connected Services
This service is available 24/7. Phone (800) 777-3600

Sponsored

 

[Sandman 4x4]

I’m beyond frustrated.

My 2020 Jeep Gladiator (VIN: 1C6HJTFG8LL131631) has been dealing with repeated engine issues: rough idling, flashing check engine light, and near stalling. The dealership diagnosed it as a failure of the camshafts, lifters, and internal components. This is a known and documented issue in these engines.

I’ve been dealing with this since August 2024, starting with spark plugs being replaced at a Ford dealership because I was trying anything to get the problem under control. That didn’t fix it. I then replaced coils, ran fuel treatments, changed the intake gaskets — nothing worked.

What makes this worse: Jeep already performed a recall repair for this exact issue in April 2023. They replaced camshafts, lifters, etc. That “fix” clearly failed, and the same components are now failing again.

The dealership submitted a Goodwill Repair request on June 26, 2025. I followed up with Jeep/Stellantis on July 2, and I have received NO response as of July 8. This is my only vehicle, and I’m stuck with a failing engine while Jeep refuses to respond or take responsibility.

I’m now escalating this to BBB, NHTSA, Jeep forums, and consumer protection outlets. If Jeep won’t take care of its customers, I’ll make sure the public knows what kind of service they can expect.


Jeep — do better.

Wow what you’re dealing with really sucks! I would try and give Jeep more time seeing as there are so many and so few part if they wish to keep production going. I’m in no way trying to be flippant here, but please tell us exactly what oil and how often you change with what weight? I’m am about to perform my third oil change, after the first two were performed free through Jeep Cares, at 3,000, then 7,000, it’s now at 11,000. But I’m in hot Central Florida and I will use the Castrol GTX Full Synthetic 5w30, in the attempt to prevent accelerated wear on valve train parts. With the understanding after a lot of reading that’s exactly what weight is used in the Jeep world market not under the EPA’s umbrella of squeezing the most mileage out of every drop of gas throughout its fleet number, without a second thought to parts wear and tear!

 

[ShadowsPapa]

But I’m in hot Central Florida and I will use the Castrol GTX Full Synthetic 5w30, in the attempt to prevent accelerated wear on valve train parts. With the understanding after a lot of reading that’s exactly what weight is used in the Jeep world market not under the EPA’s umbrella of squeezing the most mileage out of every drop of gas

No, FCA recommends the same oil world-wide.
Hootbro posted that a while back.

And the heat of Florida won't matter a lick on the number after the W. It will only matter for the first number - the 0 vs 5.
Once the engine is warmed up, it's all the same - the internal temperatures of your engine will be the same as those in IA SD, MN and so on. So that 20 vs 30 - it won't matter a lick because the engine operate at the same temperatures internally.

throughout its fleet number, without a second thought to parts wear and tear!

LOL - really? Funny. The engines were made from the ground up for the 0w20 and the API members formulated the oils in conjunction with the engine designers and auto makers
You are confusing viscosity with other things.
Millions of these operate with the recommended oil and have zero valve train issues.
Pretty much seen as "not an oil issue". Especially when you see people running 5w30 and losing cams. (yes, in other Jeep forums)

So enjoy the placebo effect.

I would try and give Jeep more time seeing as there are so many and so few part if they wish to keep production going.

Again, a laugh, as the production parts have ZIP to do with spares. They aren't connected. We've tried and tried over several years to explain that, but some just won't believe it. It's nothing at all to do with "keeping production going" - not a thing. Spares are different orders, independent of factory production numbers.
they don't and can't pull cams from the factory where Jeeps are built for fixing broken rigs - it's not done for many reasons.
Again, Hootbro has tried to explain that to people - and yet posts like this persist.

I guess people ignore facts when they are contrary to what might support their opinions or beliefs, no matter how far off those beliefs may be.

 

[Stan H]

No, FCA recommends the same oil world-wide.
Hootbro posted that a while back.

And the heat of Florida won't matter a lick on the number after the W. It will only matter for the first number - the 0 vs 5.
Once the engine is warmed up, it's all the same - the internal temperatures of your engine will be the same as those in IA SD, MN and so on. So that 20 vs 30 - it won't matter a lick because the engine operate at the same temperatures internally.


LOL - really? Funny. The engines were made from the ground up for the 0w20 and the API members formulated the oils in conjunction with the engine designers and auto makers
You are confusing viscosity with other things.
Millions of these operate with the recommended oil and have zero valve train issues.
Pretty much seen as "not an oil issue". Especially when you see people running 5w30 and losing cams. (yes, in other Jeep forums)

So enjoy the placebo effect.


Again, a laugh, as the production parts have ZIP to do with spares. They aren't connected. We've tried and tried over several years to explain that, but some just won't believe it. It's nothing at all to do with "keeping production going" - not a thing. Spares are different orders, independent of factory production numbers.
they don't and can't pull cams from the factory where Jeeps are built for fixing broken rigs - it's not done for many reasons.
Again, Hootbro has tried to explain that to people - and yet posts like this persist.

I guess people ignore facts when they are contrary to what might support their opinions or beliefs, no matter how far off those beliefs may be.

This post is correct there is a lot of confusion out there but this is correct. @ShadowsPapa

 

[Jrgunn5150]

You have a 5 year old Jeep with a failure.

It's yours.

Fix it yourself or take it to a shop. There is no infinity warranty.

 

[snowho]

Far Less than 1%
Millions have no failures.
You read about failures on the internet, not the successes.
I've had several of these engines in various jeeps and would easily buy another

What data are you using for the 1% ?

 

[Pismo61]

Check this out at 10:10.youtube.com/watch?v=XcpyJ5GTco8

 

[chr15m]

What data are you using for the 1% ?

Its generalized but there are easily over 10 million of these motors produced which is probably nearing the upper teens now.

People are bringing up the current backorder estimates of ~10k back orders on cams. Which is not accurate when used to infer that all of those are for repairs and that none are for warehouse or dealer stock. Either way, at worst if those 10k back orders were all for waiting repairs that would still account to less than a 1/10 of 1%. It'd take 100000+ back orders to even begin to near 1% of engines made.

Truthfully the rate of failure is very low, but would only really be measurable if we could record recurrent failures and mileage at the time of failures, while ruling out possible failures in workmanship or collateral failures due to other causes, etc. In sum, most likely never.

My person experience is 2 other 3.6s in the family that both logged a cumulative 800k miles without rebuild. Mine currently is at 31k.

Phaser and cam issues are not at all exclusive to Jeep, many other examples of this issue out there on other engines.

Asking working or retired mechanics, my self among those, is going to encourage answers based off empirical knowledge, its worth some attention. Failures are inevitable, so are people that believe there is some sort of mechanical system out there that never has failures. Ill take a single digit failure rate any day. I have done many tasks on systems where that rate can be closer to 20-30% or sometimes arguably higher. Even then, you just keep at it and move on. If someone gives up on their Jeep for this issue, someone else will buy that Jeep, if the issue were that bad we see them go the way of the Dodge Neon or Chevy Cavalier. Both had very high production numbers and yet I see more YJs on a weekly basis.

 

[Hootbro]

Check this out at 10:10.youtube.com/watch?v=XcpyJ5GTco8

He runs a repair shop, everything that comes in is broken.

 

[Discmaniac]

Its generalized but there are easily over 10 million of these motors produced which is probably nearing the upper teens now.

People are bringing up the current backorder estimates of ~10k back orders on cams. Which is not accurate when used to infer that all of those are for repairs and that none are for warehouse or dealer stock. Either way, at worst if those 10k back orders were all for waiting repairs that would still account to less than a 1/10 of 1%. It'd take 100000+ back orders to even begin to near 1% of engines made.

I understand where you are coming from, but your math is disingenuous. There were thousands of failures that had the last version of the tick (which prompting a redesign of the top end). Now we certainly have fewer than 10M PUG engines, and fewer still 2020-2023ish (zone where we are anecdotally seeing this issue). When you start looking at that group of engines…10k busted cams starts getting more significant.

Obviously a lot of folks have had great success with the longevity of the engines built in this time frame, and perhaps it’s cheaper for FCA to just ignore because most of the failures are near the end of power train, but there is also clearly an issue. Am I expecting the dealer to magically fix the problem? No. Does it suck and is it something FCA should have figured out already? Also yes.

 

[ShadowsPapa]

He runs a repair shop, everything that comes in is broken.

What gets me is - if they are really good, they are really super busy, but sure are able to take a lot of time to make professional videos for youtube.
They have a ton of time on their hands - amazing. We were hardly ever able to clean the floor, we were so busy. The people I know still in the business sure can't take tie to make videos - they are too busy with customers.
What's up?

Now we certainly have fewer than 10M PUG engines,

No, we don't. They were introduced in 2015 for the 2016 model year. Grand Cherokees had them - sold like crazy.
I researched the numbers of "Pentastar 3.6' engines sold as much as possible, gathering information from at least 3 years - and extrapolated out that we're easily into the 10 million range if not higher by now because last number I got was over a year ago.
They came in Ram, Grand Cherokee and many others - look up the WK2 sold each year and figure most were the 3.6

There were thousands of failures that had the last version of the tick (which prompting a redesign of the top end).

Where the heck are you getting that from? First, it makes no sense, and second - there was no tick that prompted a redesign of the top end! That's almost funny.
The upgrade engine was designed with turbo, DI and other functions in mind that never came about, but it wasn't at all because of any "tick". It was to add VVL, and modify VVT to make ESS easier (valve timing range was increased a lot to act as sort of a compression release and aid in starting the engine, reducing load on the starter and battery.
Nothing about the upgrade was due to anything with the Gen 1 version.

I don't know where you are getting any of that - but there's no logic, or even truth to it.

 

[ShadowsPapa]

Phaser and cam issues are not at all exclusive to Jeep, many other examples of this issue out there on other engines.

Oh, boy - I did some research on a Ford forum a few weeks ago - and I kept running into people with phaser issues. I was rather surprised - seemed to be a really big deal for them.

 

[chr15m]

I understand where you are coming from, but your math is disingenuous. There were thousands of failures that had the last version of the tick (which prompting a redesign of the top end). Now we certainly have fewer than 10M PUG engines, and fewer still 2020-2023ish (zone where we are anecdotally seeing this issue). When you start looking at that group of engines…10k busted cams starts getting more significant.

Obviously a lot of folks have had great success with the longevity of the engines built in this time frame, and perhaps it’s cheaper for FCA to just ignore because most of the failures are near the end of power train, but there is also clearly an issue. Am I expecting the dealer to magically fix the problem? No. Does it suck and is it something FCA should have figured out already? Also yes.

The second word of my post is key to get insight into the tone of my post.

Generalized is used to refer to the general opinion that was inquired about when asking what math is used to determine that 1%. I never implied directly that was mine. I used generalized with intent there.

Ironically you cut the quote off where you get a marginal insight into my opinion which is quite parallel to the point your making.

There is some potential for confirmation bias here that is unfortunately strong enough to make similar perspectives appear contentious when you layer in the undertone of dissent that these threads are accompanied by.

I deal with this as an engineer working with machinery every day. I'd love to coincide our opinions as it seems like it wouldn't be hard, but the one thing I have no patience for is a bias loaded lead. Or baiting. Arguments are very useful when the purpose is to find a conclusion of use. Semantic arguments in this situation are most likely to serve an ego.

In short what I wrote cannot be disingenuous as I didn't voice my math, at least in what you copied, nor did I feign in any way that I knew otherwise, it's not my base of knowledge. It is what is restated here, based purely as a summation of the most common responses.

That part left uncopied hinted at how the actual reality of the issue cannot be clearly defined.

Truly the failure rate would be best if possible at all, defined in the miles between failures in isolation to exact cases where the root cause is also know and proven to be present.

All mechanical systems fail and having a rule of failure as an occurrence would mean the failure rate would be 100% eventually.

I can with very high confidence say that of those back orders there are safety stocks in regional supply chains, personal business and in local dealerships. Those safety stocks are placed when current stock drops below a certain threshold. Not all of those are for orders awaiting repair.

 

[chr15m]

Oh, boy - I did some research on a Ford forum a few weeks ago - and I kept running into people with phaser issues. I was rather surprised - seemed to be a really big deal for them.

3.5 Ecoboost early gen, 5.4 V8..

 

[ShadowsPapa]

The second word of my post is key to get insight into the tone of my post.

Generalized is used to refer to the general opinion that was inquired about when asking what math is used to determine that 1%. I never implied directly that was mine. I used generalized with intent there.

Ironically you cut the quote off where you get a marginal insight into my opinion which is quite parallel to the point your making.

There is some potential for confirmation bias here that is unfortunately strong enough to make similar perspectives appear contentious when you layer in the undertone of dissent that these threads are accompanied by.

I deal with this as an engineer working with machinery every day. I'd love to coincide our opinions as it seems like it wouldn't be hard, but the one thing I have no patience for is a bias loaded lead. Or baiting. Arguments are very useful when the purpose is to find a conclusion of use. Semantic arguments in this situation are most likely to serve an ego.

In short what I wrote cannot be disingenuous as I didn't voice my math, at least in what you copied, nor did I feign in any way that I knew otherwise, it's not my base of knowledge. It is what is restated here, based purely as a summation of the most common responses.

That part left uncopied hinted at how the actual reality of the issue cannot be clearly defined.

Truly the failure rate would be best if possible at all, defined in the miles between failures in isolation to exact cases where the root cause is also know and proven to be present.

All mechanical systems fail and having a rule of failure as an occurrence would mean the failure rate would be 100% eventually.

I can with very high confidence say that of those back orders there are safety stocks in regional supply chains, personal business and in local dealerships. Those safety stocks are placed when current stock drops below a certain threshold. Not all of those are for orders awaiting repair.

You're hired.

Sponsored