I think my dealer is F@&:$ing me
JK Junkie
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 2,482
Likes: 1
From: Denver, CO
I'm certainly not arguing that Chrysler (or other American brands) has the reliability of many of the Japanese imports - I'm just saying that it makes no sense to intentionally design a vehicle to fail after the warranty runs out. That being said, if you feel more comfortable changing your oil at a shorter interval, have at it. It's your Jeep and your money, and I've always maintained that a person should be able to spend it as they see fit. 
JK Newbie
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 95
Likes: 0
From: RVA
I recently bought a new Jetta TDI, i purchased an 8 year maintence package it states that i get a VW oil change by the recommended intervals i think its every 8-10k miles on this particular diesel. so i have a set amount of vouchers to use for each oil change in the 8 year period. But if i want to do it every 3k or 5k miles i can still do it without a problem eventually i would just run out of vouchers or hit the 8 year mark.
Its a shame we have to deal thru Chrysler to get our Jeeps they really need to focus on costumer relationships.
Its a shame we have to deal thru Chrysler to get our Jeeps they really need to focus on costumer relationships.
JK Freak
Joined: Oct 2013
Posts: 577
Likes: 3
From: North Port, FL
. We once owned an air compressor that wouldn't die. It was extremely inefficient but just wouldn't die. We tried to refresh it and couldn't find parts. It was originally built in 1939 and the company went out of business in 1968. Why? Because they built so etching too damn good and they didn't release anything. Parts or new equipment. Got a whole lesson from the ingersoll-rand compressor guru. There is just one fine example of why a company won't build a product to last. Self preservation. The golden rule of business. Keep them coming back. Auto manufacturers do just enough in an attempt to get you again. Get an MBA. You'll understand.
"Get an MBA. You'll understand." Please...
JK Super Freak
Joined: Sep 2012
Posts: 1,564
Likes: 7
From: United States
Exactly, the companies that have a reputation for being reliable can count on making more money on the sales side. These other companies who either can't, or won't, improve reliability need to make money other ways, so they offer shorter warranties. To be fair though, Chrysler has gotten a little better doing 100k powertrain, but they still try to upsell you the 100k bumper to bumper which is a huge money maker for them because very little in these vehicles is expensive to fix other than the powertrain which a lot of people don't realize already has 100k coverage.
There are different ways to promote vehicles and build brand identities. Years ago your Detroit makers were big power for little money, that's changed and they've had a hard time finding a new identity. Japanese cars are dependable and reliable, Germans do luxury well, American is mostly just American. German cars have that reputation for failing out of warranty and that's why their resale values are so low. Fortunately for them they're mostly luxury products and rationality goes sort of out the window for a lot of those buyers. Mercedes has recently started to address the reliability/resale problem by offering 125k warranties on their certified pre-owned cars which I believe are upgradable to 3 years unlimited miles. I just don' American cars don't really have a reputation for anything as far as I'm concerned. Many(not all) of them are neither this nor that, but people still like buying American. They aren't particularly reliable or unreliable, but I'd still err on the side of caution when it comes to service intervals. It's going to cost pennies compared to a drivetrain issue and over-servicing never hurt anything.
So yes, I agree reliability and longevity are extremely important to building a brand and building loyalty, but I don't have faith that Chrysler and some other automakers have accepted that yet.
There are different ways to promote vehicles and build brand identities. Years ago your Detroit makers were big power for little money, that's changed and they've had a hard time finding a new identity. Japanese cars are dependable and reliable, Germans do luxury well, American is mostly just American. German cars have that reputation for failing out of warranty and that's why their resale values are so low. Fortunately for them they're mostly luxury products and rationality goes sort of out the window for a lot of those buyers. Mercedes has recently started to address the reliability/resale problem by offering 125k warranties on their certified pre-owned cars which I believe are upgradable to 3 years unlimited miles. I just don' American cars don't really have a reputation for anything as far as I'm concerned. Many(not all) of them are neither this nor that, but people still like buying American. They aren't particularly reliable or unreliable, but I'd still err on the side of caution when it comes to service intervals. It's going to cost pennies compared to a drivetrain issue and over-servicing never hurt anything.
So yes, I agree reliability and longevity are extremely important to building a brand and building loyalty, but I don't have faith that Chrysler and some other automakers have accepted that yet.
At any rate, we service our vehicles before the recommended intervals. We use them pretty hard. I'm also a believer that vehicles typically perform and last as long as they are in a state of good maintenance.
JK Super Freak
Joined: Sep 2012
Posts: 1,564
Likes: 7
From: United States
. We once owned an air compressor that wouldn't die. It was extremely inefficient but just wouldn't die. We tried to refresh it and couldn't find parts. It was originally built in 1939 and the company went out of business in 1968. Why? Because they built so etching too damn good and they didn't release anything. Parts or new equipment. Got a whole lesson from the ingersoll-rand compressor guru. There is just one fine example of why a company won't build a product to last. Self preservation. The golden rule of business. Keep them coming back. Auto manufacturers do just enough in an attempt to get you again. Get an MBA. You'll understand.
Designing something to fail can end in a lawsuit. You won't find documentation in file shares at automotive manufacturing companies that recommends or advises their engineers to design things that fail.
What they can do, however, is design something to meet standards that is "just good enough".
Anyone who's wrenched on a vehicle knows this. Pop clips that can't be reused, self-tapping screws that strip, self-tapping screws in the frame, etc. I mean, look at the JK water pump failures. We all know there are better water pumps used in other vehicles, so why didn't Jeep borrow one from Ford, or Toyota when they knew we'd be using these Jeeps in very remote locations? Well, because it was cheaper not to, and because they got a few vehicles to pass their warranty testing with the original water pump, they called it a day.
If every automaker built their vehicles like the old Mercedes 300D's, the average ownership span of a new vehicle would be longer than the current 7-ish years that it is now.
This isn't MBA material. This is high-school level Business 101.
JK Freak
Joined: Feb 2013
Posts: 830
Likes: 1
From: LI, NY
I don't want to come off as entirely crass, but your assumptions make you sound like you might not have a breadth of experience owning many different makes of cars, both foreign and domestic. You might be stepping on toes with some of you statements as some of them are very broad and lacking any empirical data. If you have, that's great, but I'd say most of the American car owners on here (myself included) would probably agree that, especially in the last 30 years, the car tends to fall apart around the engine/transmission, not the other way around. The power train warranties that are now 60k, 100k, etc were virtually free for automakers to offer. They are well aware of their own strengths and weaknesses. Notice how bumper-to-bumper warranties have never really moved off of 36k or 3 years.
At any rate, we service our vehicles before the recommended intervals. We use them pretty hard. I'm also a believer that vehicles typically perform and last as long as they are in a state of good maintenance.
At any rate, we service our vehicles before the recommended intervals. We use them pretty hard. I'm also a believer that vehicles typically perform and last as long as they are in a state of good maintenance.
I think one of the confusing sentiments in this thread is "designed to fail" versus "building it good enough".
Designing something to fail can end in a lawsuit. You won't find documentation in file shares at automotive manufacturing companies that recommends or advises their engineers to design things that fail.
What they can do, however, is design something to meet standards that is "just good enough".
Anyone who's wrenched on a vehicle knows this. Pop clips that can't be reused, self-tapping screws that strip, self-tapping screws in the frame, etc. I mean, look at the JK water pump failures. We all know there are better water pumps used in other vehicles, so why didn't Jeep borrow one from Ford, or Toyota when they knew we'd be using these Jeeps in very remote locations? Well, because it was cheaper not to, and because they got a few vehicles to pass their warranty testing with the original water pump, they called it a day.
If every automaker built their vehicles like the old Mercedes 300D's, the average ownership span of a new vehicle would be longer than the current 7-ish years that it is now.
This isn't MBA material. This is high-school level Business 101.
Designing something to fail can end in a lawsuit. You won't find documentation in file shares at automotive manufacturing companies that recommends or advises their engineers to design things that fail.
What they can do, however, is design something to meet standards that is "just good enough".
Anyone who's wrenched on a vehicle knows this. Pop clips that can't be reused, self-tapping screws that strip, self-tapping screws in the frame, etc. I mean, look at the JK water pump failures. We all know there are better water pumps used in other vehicles, so why didn't Jeep borrow one from Ford, or Toyota when they knew we'd be using these Jeeps in very remote locations? Well, because it was cheaper not to, and because they got a few vehicles to pass their warranty testing with the original water pump, they called it a day.
If every automaker built their vehicles like the old Mercedes 300D's, the average ownership span of a new vehicle would be longer than the current 7-ish years that it is now.
This isn't MBA material. This is high-school level Business 101.
JK Freak
Joined: Oct 2013
Posts: 577
Likes: 3
From: North Port, FL
What you're suggesting is the intentional and overt sabotage of a vehicle by the manufacturer (albeit by proxy). Is this what you really believe? Extending the service intervals has no revenue-saving benefits to Chrysler itself (since they are not paying for the oil changes beyond those few in the first couple years), which means that the only reason they would do this (if it were really damaging to the engines) is to intentionally cause unnecessary wear on your vehicle.
JK Freak
Joined: Jul 2012
Posts: 548
Likes: 0
From: United States
I change my own oil, and fluids. I buy my filters from a dealer two minutes from my house, but for warranty work I take it to a dealer that 30 minutes away. I did my first oil change at 3000, and my first full fluid change at 10,000. I don't really trust any dealer.
JK Freak
Joined: Feb 2013
Posts: 830
Likes: 1
From: LI, NY
Of course things are going to have a higher frequency of failure the older they get. I've never heard of any machine becoming more reliable as it gets older. That's like saying a person is more likely to have a heart attack once they become an adult...
What you're suggesting is the intentional and overt sabotage of a vehicle by the manufacturer (albeit by proxy). Is this what you really believe? Extending the service intervals has no revenue-saving benefits to Chrysler itself (since they are not paying for the oil changes beyond those few in the first couple years), which means that the only reason they would do this (if it were really damaging to the engines) is to intentionally cause unnecessary wear on your vehicle.
What you're suggesting is the intentional and overt sabotage of a vehicle by the manufacturer (albeit by proxy). Is this what you really believe? Extending the service intervals has no revenue-saving benefits to Chrysler itself (since they are not paying for the oil changes beyond those few in the first couple years), which means that the only reason they would do this (if it were really damaging to the engines) is to intentionally cause unnecessary wear on your vehicle.
You say extending the service intervals has no value to Chrysler? Oil Changes on a couple million cars add up very quickly, so extending the service interval to nearly 3x the traditional accepted standard is saving A LOT of money. Add to that the fact that it's probably accelerating the wear and tear at least a little bit and they're cutting costs and while increasing the need/demand for parts and repairs. Maybe it's cynical of me to think that way, or maybe you're just naïve. All I know is that my Infiniti, serviced every 3k or less lasted 227k with not a worry in the world when I sold it. My parents' cars, from 7 series to Range Rovers and Suburbans have always just been serviced based on the extended intervals and they've all had major problems. Maybe it's the Japanese build quality that kept my Infiniti going, but I've seen plenty of Infinitis fall apart when not maintained.
JK Super Freak
Joined: Sep 2012
Posts: 1,564
Likes: 7
From: United States
We also can't ignore the fact that extending oil change intervals has been an EPA initiative for quite a long time.
Simultaneously, engine oil is designed to last longer.
Notice that all owners manuals now have recommendations to change earlier than the recommended interval in hard-use scenarios. They don't define what those are.
I believe the EPA actually recommends oil testing, i.e. "see for yourself." If you're destroying oil before the recommended change interval, change more often. If not, go longer.
Simultaneously, engine oil is designed to last longer.
Notice that all owners manuals now have recommendations to change earlier than the recommended interval in hard-use scenarios. They don't define what those are.
I believe the EPA actually recommends oil testing, i.e. "see for yourself." If you're destroying oil before the recommended change interval, change more often. If not, go longer.