Surprised I didn't see it on the beeb first. Did I miss it, or are we too distracted with politics this week? https://www.freep.com/story/money/cars/chrysler/2019/01/10/jeep-ram-fca-settlement/2530204002/
Maybe they'll take pity on me and give me some cash anyway. If I ever buy another diesel, it'll say Cummins on it.
I want to see more specifics on what they actually did. This should be on every news channel in the U.S., but of course I have to come to the beeb to get the real news. WTF
Maybe it's time to redesign the test. How much did the EPA spend to review millions of lines of code?
If your dodge ram has 10x as many lines of code vs a modern 747 then we need to seriously re-think automobiles these days.
With as many issues you had with it, they should. Can't go wrong with a cummins, even better once you delete the emission systems
Which part(s) are they comparing would be a start on that one - but overall plane engines don't have to control as much as cars.
They have had a number of issues. Excessive DEF use, hard cold , egr valve and injector problem. I believe they are getting better but early ones had issues.
I guess if we are only talking actual engine controls, but bring flight controls into the picture. Shit the world just watched a new 737 crash because the pilots didn't know all the automated responses the aircraft would force to happen without them inputting any controls.
That sounds like cummins is trying to recreate a 6.0 power stroke in 5.0 form. But seriously, I don't now how much of that is on cummins and how much of that is on Nissan. I though I read somewhere that the def and diesel particulate filter on the Ram is a Chrysler design and they are responsible for those components. Either way, it sucks to put up a nice chunk of money for a vehicle and have issues with it.
Just finished spending 7 months driving the 3.0 Ecodiesel in 2015 Ram 1500, and I was very happy with it. Fuel mileage was rediculously good, power was decent and didnt do anything to it other than oil changes. I was quite happy with it. Now driving a Tundra, and this damn thing drinks fuel like it is a 40ft yacht in comparison.
Agreed, I think they're just comparing engine to engine. No way it's that low if they add in all of the systems on a plane.
And just because the code is there doesn't mean it is being used. I'm aware of aircraft systems where the code that is activated is dependent on which aircraft the software is loaded on. The comparison in the article to a 787 is dumb.