OIL, 0-20 or otherwise (couldn't find the other oil threads)

[ShadowsPapa]

Let's put different oil grade to the side for a moment. Would logic dictate that if correct oil grade and spec was used at recommended interval, any failure was not due to the oil itself and that leaves either design, assembly or component material defect?

The short of it - yes.

I have some questions on the design, but not being a current FCA tech with full access to what I want access to - I can't even look at things from what's in my mind here and there.

Times like this, odd as it may sound, I wish I wasn't retired and sort of wish I had at least part time position hands-on with these things.

Sponsored

 

[ShadowsPapa]

Well, they’ve been revamped but the end result is essentially the same, having to replace rockers, cams, etc. Actually it seems worse now in that the needle bearings were failing at close to 100k miles, if not more. With the latest Penastar, reported issues are being reported much earlier, in some cases less than 30k miles, which begs the question, did this not surface on testing??

A lot of questions -
This engine - the PUG (Pentastar UpGrade) has been around since 2015 for the 2016 model year.
Did these early engines have issues? Did the 2016-2018 Grand Cherokees and other FCA vehicles with the PUG have these issues?
OR - did it surface with the 2020 model year?
Or the 2018 model year when the PUG first came out in the WRANGLER (JL - JK had the prior gen Pentastar)?

The prior issues were as you indicated - needle bearings in the rollers that spanned the cam lobe.
Now the issue is with the high lift piece that rubs, not rolls, on the cam lobe.
But - that should only have any pressure on it above 3,000 RPM.
So - is this also happening in the PUG where people keep the RPM down and don't see 3,000+ RPM often, or is it happening mostly with those who are seeing the higher RPM where the pressure is on the center of the follower?

 

[BlackRuby23]

So - is this also happening in the PUG where people keep the RPM down and don't see 3,000+ RPM often, or is it happening mostly with those who are seeing the higher RPM where the pressure is on the center of the follower?

Weren't you originally saying it was substandard parts production? Now you're suggesting perhaps a design flaw? I'm just trying to understand what is truly causing this issue which seems to be a fairly large problem.

 

[Stan H]

Weren't you originally saying it was substandard parts production? Now you're suggesting perhaps a design flaw? I'm just trying to understand what is truly causing this issue which seems to be a fairly large problem.

I dont think overall it's that large . If 10,500 cames are on back order and they sold 900,000 units in a single year some years (true) and alot of those with 3.6L.VVT,VVL then I think its around 1% at most . IMHO

 

[ShadowsPapa]

Weren't you originally saying it was substandard parts production? Now you're suggesting perhaps a design flaw? I'm just trying to understand what is truly causing this issue which seems to be a fairly large problem.

I'm not suggesting either parts issue, or design flaw -
or, maybe it's both.

I have trouble seeing this as "one thing will fix it all". At least at this point.

Why the right side in the majority, if not large majority, of all cases?

It's possible we have a stack-up of issues, one thing burying or covering another issue, masking it.

Time for a poll to gather build months/years, and which side went, if possible, which lobes were impacted first - if that's even a thing.

 

[Charles 236]

A lot of questions -
This engine - the PUG (Pentastar UpGrade) has been around since 2015 for the 2016 model year.
Did these early engines have issues? Did the 2016-2018 Grand Cherokees and other FCA vehicles with the PUG have these issues?
OR - did it surface with the 2020 model year?
Or the 2018 model year when the PUG first came out in the WRANGLER (JL - JK had the prior gen Pentastar)?

The prior issues were as you indicated - needle bearings in the rollers that spanned the cam lobe.
Now the issue is with the high lift piece that rubs, not rolls, on the cam lobe.
But - that should only have any pressure on it above 3,000 RPM.
So - is this also happening in the PUG where people keep the RPM down and don't see 3,000+ RPM often, or is it happening mostly with those who are seeing the higher RPM where the pressure is on the center of the follower?

The early PUGs almost never saw a true high lift rocker and cam lobe failure of the type that we see in the '20 and up PUGs. In fact, I can't remember even ONE rocker and lobe failure in the '16-'19 PUGs. What I did see was the high lift release pin sticking in some rare cases, causing a misfire which required a new rocker and lash adjuster to repair.

 

[ShadowsPapa]

The early PUGs almost never saw a true high lift rocker and cam lobe failure of the type that we see in the '20 and up PUGs. In fact, I can't remember even ONE rocker and lobe failure in the '16-'19 PUGs. What I did see was the high lift release pin sticking in some rare cases, causing a misfire which required a new rocker and lash adjuster to repair.

Exactly the sort of information I'd love to have. More data.

That sort of leaves out design - since failures were rare early on.
And oil - if the PUG always required 0w20, which my documents state is from 2015, day one, then that indicates that the same oil in those first years was fine.
So we get into what any good troubleshooter asks as a first question - "what changed"?

This is from a 2015 training doc - and tells me they used that oil from day one.
So if that's the case, and the first PUG engines up to 2019 model years didn't have serous cam issues...........

 

[Charles 236]

I never bothered to keep written records of failures in different engine families, but my recollection is that other than the rare high lift failure to release (going into the normal low lift mode where these engines spend most of their running time), the PUG engines were absolutely first rate. I don't know what changed in the model year '20 and up PUGs, but the first PUGs that I replaced intake cams in were '20s. Since then, I replace a couple of right bank intake cams every month. Or did, until the current intergalactic backorder of intake cams.

 

[Deleted member 67086]

I'm not suggesting either parts issue, or design flaw -
or, maybe it's both.

I have trouble seeing this as "one thing will fix it all". At least at this point.

Why the right side in the majority, if not large majority, of all cases?

It's possible we have a stack-up of issues, one thing burying or covering another issue, masking it.

Time for a poll to gather build months/years, and which side went, if possible, which lobes were impacted first - if that's even a thing.

You touched on one of my thoughts too, why predominantly the right bank? My assumption would be the left and right valve train components are manufactured by the same company, so if it was a quality issue with them, it would be affecting both banks. Makes me think it may be a oiling issue (ex. Passage) with that bank. Is it predominantly affecting certain cylinders…?

 

[Batterycap]

on point

 

[ShadowsPapa]

on point

That shit AGAIN? You read too much into that. It's a BANDAID! It's not a fix. Go back and read the other posts. That's been brought up at least 4 times and doesn't even begin to apply here.
Wow, what some will read into a video that's intended for a totally different purpose.

Engines prior to the problem time period still use the original oil. Engines after that time period- use the original oil.
GM states that if the engine is replaced - GO BACK to using the original oil.
Nice try, but it doesn't apply here at all. It's to shut customers up and prevent GM from having to fix many hundreds of vehicles. Heck, slap in a case of STP.

You touched on one of my thoughts too, why predominantly the right bank? My assumption would be the left and right valve train components are manufactured by the same company, so if it was a quality issue with them, it would be affecting both banks. Makes me think it may be a oiling issue (ex. Passage) with that bank. Is it predominantly affecting certain cylinders…?

Interesting that it really only started showing up in around 2020. So I ask - "what changed".
The PUG was around in 2015 for the 2016 model year - those engines 2016 - 2019 didn't have problems.

 

[Stan H]

Quality control.

 

[Hootbro]

Quality control.

Like mentioned though, why not both banks if that was the case?

 

[Stan H]

Like mentioned though, why not both banks if that was the case?

Castings ? Faulty moldings ? Faulty head casting ?

 

[Hootbro]

Castings ? Faulty moldings ? Faulty head casting ?

Still though, one side is the lions share of problems?

I do not know how true, but the only thing that ever made sense was the claim the RH side head was the last place to build oil pressure from sitting cold.

Sponsored