Recall: Manual Transmission / Clutch Recall for 2020-2021 Jeep Gladiator (Notice: 21V-028)

[Rubi_Rhod]

So, in some additional reading, it’s a failure of the intermediate pressure plate as this is a twin disc setup..

this pic is from another twin disc setup as I wasn’t able to find one of our Asian AL6.

View attachment 132266

I can see now and how that part could see some extreme heat and fail as it is the intermediary between the clutch discs and doesn’t have the thermal capacity as the flywheel or outer pressure plate.

To this extent, the centerforce aftermarket clutch goes back to a single disc setup. Which will likely diminish the NVH seen from the twin disc setup, but be more durable for those high temp/ high stress events one can see in a Jeep vs street car.

https://www.centerforce.com/articles/centerforce-dual-friction-kdf157077

As is the case with things, Just Empty Every Pocket and head to the aftermarket. I’d hope this avenue would be suitable.

Sponsored

 

[jebiruph]

For those interested in what the JL/JT clutch looks like, here are pictures from the recall on my JL.

 

[kd1yt]

So, in some additional reading, it’s a failure of the intermediate pressure plate as this is a twin disc setup..

I don't think that this is actually a twin disc (I have another vehicle which is truly a twin disc, in which there are literally two completely separate double sided friction plates, with a solid plate in between), it's a dual mass flywheel, which is confirmed by jebiruph's photos and described in a general way at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dual-mass_flywheel

Almost all new OE MT clutches/flywheels are now DMF, it allows them to weigh less (a big priority these days) and to have lower NVH (which could never be attained with a lightweight flywheel). I understand why manufacturers use them (probably especially with the start-stop where they don't want the starter to have to spin up a big heavy flywheel each time) but I detest the things - too much to go wrong and a lot less stored up energy to get you going from a stop. Give me a flywheel that is just a big dumb heavy flywheel that can be counted upon to always do what big dumb heavy flywheels will always, unfailingly, do.

 

[Rubi_Rhod]

I don't think that this is actually a twin disc (I have another vehicle which is truly a twin disc, in which there are literally two completely separate double sided friction plates, with a solid plate in between), it's a dual mass flywheel, which is confirmed by jebiruph's photos and described in a general way at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dual-mass_flywheel

if you look in the photo with the pressure plate, you can see the second clutch disk. It rides on the splines of the disk that is removed.
It looks to be encapsulated, but the disk is there if you look again. I had to stare a bit, as it’s a new setup for me.

 

[Deleted member 30519]

Ughh.just got mine after the jeep app had an update today.

 

[SelfmodJT]

I would also love to know what the driver was doing when their clutch blew and the build specks of their Jeep. Keep in mind some people have 37s or 35s on 3.73 gears with manuals. We don't know the specifics of the incidents that led to this, alot of contributing factors.

So, in some additional reading, it’s a failure of the intermediate pressure plate as this is a twin disc setup..

this pic is from another twin disc setup as I wasn’t able to find one of our Asian AL6.

View attachment 132266

I can see now and how that part could see some extreme heat and fail as it is the intermediary between the clutch discs and doesn’t have the thermal capacity as the flywheel or outer pressure plate.

To this extent, the centerforce aftermarket clutch goes back to a single disc setup. Which will likely diminish the NVH seen from the twin disc setup, but be more durable for those high temp/ high stress events one can see in a Jeep vs street car.

https://www.centerforce.com/articles/centerforce-dual-friction-kdf157077

As is the case with things, Just Empty Every Pocket and head to the aftermarket. I’d hope this avenue would be suitable.

Seems like this company centerforce has a lot of complaints for their clutches. Any other recommendations? Whats the point of replacing one headache for another potentially bigger headache. Atleast one falls under warranty.

 

[Rubi_Rhod]

Seems like this company centerforce has a lot of complaints for their clutches. Any other recommendations? Whats the point of replacing one headache for another potentially bigger headache. Atleast one falls under warranty.

Well, benefit to the Centerforce is that its single disc, so the catastrophic failure and fire goes away.
They are redoing their clutch friction material, should be out March.
One headache is clutch chatter, the other headache is ECU nannies and a fragile pressure plate.

 

[Jim_n_Tx]

FCA's "solution" sounds like their "fix" for engine knocking on my Grand Cherokee recall: detune engine by timing change (software change) that reduced engine power. Did not take it for recall - mine never knocked.

 

[MrKnowitall]

Seems like this company centerforce has a lot of complaints for their clutches. Any other recommendations? Whats the point of replacing one headache for another potentially bigger headache. Atleast one falls under warranty.

Looks like they have both, a Centerforce 2 and dual friction clutch kit available. Are the complaints with both?

 

[USMC32GTR]

This makes no sense to me. Seems like some part would be causing partial engagement / disengagement so why not fix that? Instead they are going to monitor (with what sensor?) for the symptom and then detune torque?

 

[SelfmodJT]

This makes no sense to me. Seems like some part would be causing partial engagement / disengagement so why not fix that? Instead they are going to monitor (with what sensor?) for the symptom and then detune torque?

I think they dont know wtf is actually wrong with it if you ask me. I thought they replaced the clutch assembly last recall? Those that have been replaced were also recalled again. Unless, did they replace the clutch with the same clutch lol?

 

[Munkey Boy]

The closest explanation/admission is "bad design." Whether that is in the clutch assembly or elsewhere, the next economical step for them is to have software limp when the clutch temp reaches X degrees. Not sure if it has a temp sensor, but any IR sensor can be added or the other sensors in line can be tuned to extrapolate combined data to do the same.

What we are all speculating on is that this seems like a Band-Aid on a broken arm. We can assume that the clutch pack is not heavy duty enough and/or that there is a flaw in the system that opens the clutch, such as air in the master. There is no info yet as to what detonated the clutch in the first place as pilot error can likely take a fair chunk of responsibility. Could be combinations of factors that none of us are privy to. Our minds tend to drift towards replacing the weak link with something reliable and tested like a heavy flywheel/single clutch plate system; however, that would be unsound for FCA to invest in that direction YET as there are other systems like ESS that hinge on the twin disc or DMF, whichever it is. A simple swap just isn't that simple, but it is VERY expensive when you factor in all of the manuals. It's not good news, recalls never are, but if the software change goes into limp mode when the clutch approaches grenading itself, we know that this will be outrageously inconvenient. However, I think we can all agree that a blown clutch would be far worse.

I'll just be patient until they make official announcements and give us thorough explanations of exactly what happened and more importantly their logical conclusions as to mending it. I think we can all smell bullshit better than a smoking clutch, so let's wait and see what they find out then go from there.

 

[Rubi_Rhod]

as there are other systems like ESS that hinge on the twin disc or DMF, whichever it is.

That's an interesting point on ESS. It would like a lighter flywheel I bet, as it takes a big load off the strain of the starter than turning a big flywheel. That said... I'd tazer out the ESS from turning back on and go single if the aftermarket kit clears its second revision. As the results have been good on initial, it just had a funky friction material that wasn't up to par, and they acknowledged that.

I definitely see a connection to the whole of the parts Jeep chose to do the job for a variety of reasons. And looking at the OEM parts and such, it doesn't seem like Jeep tried to do anything cheap or short changed for the sake of penny pinching. But it did seem to make a few compromises for the rules and compliance. So while I hope the fix is palatable for most, I definitely want to have the flexibility to not have extra fences and compromises that err on the side of refinement and compliance vs stout dumb dependability.

Problem is, they won't say anything like this level of design decisions and compromises, as legal teams would probably count that as admission of fault or something, so all the news is pretty vague, so trying to find the sense in it all vs perceived malice.

I did keep Mopar at a far stick for a while, but watching what they have done in the last decade or so really showed a lot of attention to detail so I want to assume it was built right, but me being ham fisted, I would like to have a safe option to be a little more ruff and ready vs total refinement.

 

[Terry]

The remedy is to add software to reduce engine torque capability? So the problem is a defective clutch pressure plate and the solution is software? What will reducing engine torque capability mean for the overall torque the truck puts out? Seems like a band-aid. But I'm not a mechanic.

You don't need to be a mechanic to understand what's happening here. They built the vehicles with either a defective or undersized pressure plate and the fix is to reduce the torque so the crap, yes crap, they installed will do the job. Good luck with an under-powered Jeep after this BS fix.

 

[Terry]

The closest explanation/admission is "bad design." Whether that is in the clutch assembly or elsewhere, the next economical step for them is to have software limp when the clutch temp reaches X degrees. Not sure if it has a temp sensor, but any IR sensor can be added or the other sensors in line can be tuned to extrapolate combined data to do the same.

What we are all speculating on is that this seems like a Band-Aid on a broken arm. We can assume that the clutch pack is not heavy duty enough and/or that there is a flaw in the system that opens the clutch, such as air in the master. There is no info yet as to what detonated the clutch in the first place as pilot error can likely take a fair chunk of responsibility. Could be combinations of factors that none of us are privy to. Our minds tend to drift towards replacing the weak link with something reliable and tested like a heavy flywheel/single clutch plate system; however, that would be unsound for FCA to invest in that direction YET as there are other systems like ESS that hinge on the twin disc or DMF, whichever it is. A simple swap just isn't that simple, but it is VERY expensive when you factor in all of the manuals. It's not good news, recalls never are, but if the software change goes into limp mode when the clutch approaches grenading itself, we know that this will be outrageously inconvenient. However, I think we can all agree that a blown clutch would be far worse.

I'll just be patient until they make official announcements and give us thorough explanations of exactly what happened and more importantly their logical conclusions as to mending it. I think we can all smell bullshit better than a smoking clutch, so let's wait and see what they find out then go from there.

I smell the bullshit already... And for those wondering, I graduated from the General Motors Training Center in Burbank, CA before becoming a line mechanic in a Buick Dealership.

Sponsored