Daimler Chrysler recalls 600,000 Durangos, Dakotas

NOTE: lots of posts dating back to 2000/2001 in alt.autos.dodge.trucks
about premature wear and failure of upper ball joints in
Durango/Dakota. It's about time DC did something about this. Problem
is, seems it should include '96-'99 vehicles as well.

I remember a newspaper article about a guy that went to DC to get them
to repair the dammage caused by a wheel that flipped out because it
came out of the ball joint. I think at first DCX refused, then they
said they would if signed an agreement that he would never publicize
the incident. He refused and had a private garage repair it and then
he went public.

DC definately gets a black eye over this one. So much for customer
service...

-------------------

DCX recalls 600,000 Durangos, Dakotas
December 11, 2004
BY DEE-ANN DURBIN
ASSOCIATED PRESS

WASHINGTON -- Bowing to pressure from federal safety regulators,
DaimlerChrysler AG said Friday it is recalling 600,000 Dodge Durango
SUVs and Dakota pickups because of a defect that can cause their
wheels to fall off.

The recall affects four-wheel drive vehicles from the 2000-03 model
years. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration recommended
the recall after a 16-month investigation revealed that the vehicles'
upper ball joints could fail. If that happens, the suspension can
collapse, and a wheel can fall off.

DaimlerChrysler also is extending the warranty to 10 years or 100,000
miles on the suspension upper ball joints on an additional 400,000
Durango front-wheel drive SUVs and Dakota front-wheel drive pickups
from model years 2000 to 2003. NHTSA didn't request a recall of the
front-wheel drive versions, but DaimlerChrysler wanted to include
those customers by extending their warranties, Chrysler Group
spokesman Max Gates said.

NHTSA announced a separate recall Friday of 2004 Durangos because a
cable can short-circuit and cause a fire under the hood. There are
71,763 vehicles involved in that recall.

On Thursday, after word spread that NHTSA was requesting a recall,
DaimlerChrysler acknowledged a problem with the ball joints but said
it didn't believe it warranted a safety recall. DaimlerChrysler says
there have been no reported injuries due to the defect that have been
substantiated by the company. There also are no injuries due to ball
joint failures listed in NHTSA's files.

Gates said owners would hear noises before a ball joint failed.

The automaker will repair vehicles for free starting next month. It
costs between $750 and $1,200 to replace the ball joint, depending on
the dealer and the area, according to a lawsuit filed against
DaimlerChrysler by Durango owners in North Carolina. DaimlerChrysler
said it will reimburse owners who already paid for the repair.When
NHTSA opened its investigation in July 2003, there were 28 complaints
about upper ball joint failure and five reports of crashes. NHTSA
spokeswoman Liz Neblett couldn't provide updated numbers Friday.

Some Dodge dealers were deluged with calls from worried Durango and
Dakota owners Friday after news media reports of the problem.

By afternoon, Ourisman Dodge in Alexandria, Va., had gotten 20
telephone calls, service manager Oscar Chavez said. Chavez said he was
forwarding calls to DaimlerChrysler.

The frenzy over the Durango offered an unusual glimpse into the
auto-recall process. NHTSA often sends letters recommending a recall,
but the letters aren't usually publicized. The agency then works with
automakers to determine when the recall will take place.

In most cases, the recommendation is enough to spark a recall. The
agency has taken automakers to court to force recalls nine times in
its 34-year history, Neblett said. The last court action that resulted
in a recall was in 1979, when NHTSA forced Fiat to recall vehicles
because of a rust problem.

While a recall of 600,000 vehicles is substantial, it's not the
largest in the industry this year. In March, General Motors Corp.
announced it was recalling nearly 4 million trucks because their
tailgates could fall off.

Meanwhile, Ford Motor Co. said Friday it is recalling about 474,000
Ford Escape SUVs worldwide because of an accelerator problem that can
cause the engine to race.

The automaker said it does not know of any accidents or injuries
related to the problem.

The recalled vehicles are from model years 2002 to 2004.

In addition, Honda agreed to replace the faulty oil filters believed
responsible for engine fires in 2003-2005 CR-V sport utility vehicles.

Honda will begin notifying approximately 295,000 CR-V owners of the
potential for the vehicle to catch fire after its first oil change.
Honda will also offer to inspect the oil filters of recently serviced
CR-Vs and replace the filters free if necessary.

MoPar Man wrote:
> NOTE: lots of posts dating back to 2000/2001 in alt.autos.dodge.trucks
> about premature wear and failure of upper ball joints in
> Durango/Dakota. It's about time DC did something about this. Problem
> is, seems it should include '96-'99 vehicles as well.
>
> I remember a newspaper article about a guy that went to DC to get them
> to repair the dammage caused by a wheel that flipped out because it
> came out of the ball joint. I think at first DCX refused, then they
> said they would if signed an agreement that he would never publicize
> the incident. He refused and had a private garage repair it and then
> he went public.
>
> DC definately gets a black eye over this one. So much for customer
> service...
>
> -------------------
>
> DCX recalls 600,000 Durangos, Dakotas
> December 11, 2004
> BY DEE-ANN DURBIN
> ASSOCIATED PRESS
>
> WASHINGTON -- Bowing to pressure from federal safety regulators,
> DaimlerChrysler AG said Friday it is recalling 600,000 Dodge Durango
> SUVs and Dakota pickups because of a defect that can cause their
> wheels to fall off.
>
> The recall affects four-wheel drive vehicles from the 2000-03 model
> years. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration recommended
> the recall after a 16-month investigation revealed that the vehicles'
> upper ball joints could fail. If that happens, the suspension can
> collapse, and a wheel can fall off.
>
> DaimlerChrysler also is extending the warranty to 10 years or 100,000
> miles on the suspension upper ball joints on an additional 400,000
> Durango front-wheel drive SUVs and Dakota front-wheel drive pickups
> from model years 2000 to 2003. NHTSA didn't request a recall of the
> front-wheel drive versions, but DaimlerChrysler wanted to include
> those customers by extending their warranties, Chrysler Group
> spokesman Max Gates said.
>

I don't think I've ever seen a front wheel drive Dakota or Durango.
--
..boB
1997 HD FXDWG - Turbocharged!
2001 Dodge Dakota QC 5.9/4x4/3.92
1983 GMC Jimmy - Mountain Beater
1966 Mustang Coupe - Daily Driver
1966 FFR Cobra - Ongoing project

MoPar Man wrote:
> NOTE: lots of posts dating back to 2000/2001 in alt.autos.dodge.trucks
> about premature wear and failure of upper ball joints in
> Durango/Dakota. It's about time DC did something about this. Problem
> is, seems it should include '96-'99 vehicles as well.
>
> I remember a newspaper article about a guy that went to DC to get them
> to repair the dammage caused by a wheel that flipped out because it
> came out of the ball joint. I think at first DCX refused, then they
> said they would if signed an agreement that he would never publicize
> the incident. He refused and had a private garage repair it and then
> he went public.
>
> DC definately gets a black eye over this one. So much for customer
> service...
>
> -------------------
>
> DCX recalls 600,000 Durangos, Dakotas
> December 11, 2004
> BY DEE-ANN DURBIN
> ASSOCIATED PRESS
>
> WASHINGTON -- Bowing to pressure from federal safety regulators,
> DaimlerChrysler AG said Friday it is recalling 600,000 Dodge Durango
> SUVs and Dakota pickups because of a defect that can cause their
> wheels to fall off.
>
> The recall affects four-wheel drive vehicles from the 2000-03 model
> years. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration recommended
> the recall after a 16-month investigation revealed that the vehicles'
> upper ball joints could fail. If that happens, the suspension can
> collapse, and a wheel can fall off.
>
> DaimlerChrysler also is extending the warranty to 10 years or 100,000
> miles on the suspension upper ball joints on an additional 400,000
> Durango front-wheel drive SUVs and Dakota front-wheel drive pickups
> from model years 2000 to 2003. NHTSA didn't request a recall of the
> front-wheel drive versions, but DaimlerChrysler wanted to include
> those customers by extending their warranties, Chrysler Group
> spokesman Max Gates said.
>

I don't think I've ever seen a front wheel drive Dakota or Durango.
--
..boB
1997 HD FXDWG - Turbocharged!
2001 Dodge Dakota QC 5.9/4x4/3.92
1983 GMC Jimmy - Mountain Beater
1966 Mustang Coupe - Daily Driver
1966 FFR Cobra - Ongoing project

MoPar Man wrote:
> NOTE: lots of posts dating back to 2000/2001 in alt.autos.dodge.trucks
> about premature wear and failure of upper ball joints in
> Durango/Dakota. It's about time DC did something about this. Problem
> is, seems it should include '96-'99 vehicles as well.
>
> I remember a newspaper article about a guy that went to DC to get them
> to repair the dammage caused by a wheel that flipped out because it
> came out of the ball joint. I think at first DCX refused, then they
> said they would if signed an agreement that he would never publicize
> the incident. He refused and had a private garage repair it and then
> he went public.
>
> DC definately gets a black eye over this one. So much for customer
> service...

Whats even worse, is some idiot on this newsgroup defended the ball
joints... i had to replace mine 3 times on my 98 Durango. I sold the Durango
and got a 2003 4 runner. 0 problems for the two years that I owned it.

MoPar Man wrote:
> NOTE: lots of posts dating back to 2000/2001 in alt.autos.dodge.trucks
> about premature wear and failure of upper ball joints in
> Durango/Dakota. It's about time DC did something about this. Problem
> is, seems it should include '96-'99 vehicles as well.
>
> I remember a newspaper article about a guy that went to DC to get them
> to repair the dammage caused by a wheel that flipped out because it
> came out of the ball joint. I think at first DCX refused, then they
> said they would if signed an agreement that he would never publicize
> the incident. He refused and had a private garage repair it and then
> he went public.
>
> DC definately gets a black eye over this one. So much for customer
> service...

Whats even worse, is some idiot on this newsgroup defended the ball
joints... i had to replace mine 3 times on my 98 Durango. I sold the Durango
and got a 2003 4 runner. 0 problems for the two years that I owned it.

"tcrewe" > wrote in message
...
> Is there a WEBSITE that anyone knows of where I can check my 2000 DAKOTA
> P/U
> Or do I just call Daimler Canada ??
>
> "Dan J.S." > wrote in message
> ...
>> MoPar Man wrote:
>> > NOTE: lots of posts dating back to 2000/2001 in alt.autos.dodge.trucks
>> > about premature wear and failure of upper ball joints in
>> > Durango/Dakota. It's about time DC did something about this. Problem
>> > is, seems it should include '96-'99 vehicles as well.
>> >
>> > I remember a newspaper article about a guy that went to DC to get them
>> > to repair the dammage caused by a wheel that flipped out because it
>> > came out of the ball joint. I think at first DCX refused, then they
>> > said they would if signed an agreement that he would never publicize
>> > the incident. He refused and had a private garage repair it and then
>> > he went public.
>> >
>> > DC definately gets a black eye over this one. So much for customer
>> > service...
>>
>> Whats even worse, is some idiot on this newsgroup defended the ball
>> joints... i had to replace mine 3 times on my 98 Durango. I sold the
> Durango
>> and got a 2003 4 runner. 0 problems for the two years that I owned it.
>>
>>
>
>

I was looking at www.4adodge.com and there is a box to click search. Put in
the word recall, and then it takes you to another page where you can enter
the last few letters/numbers of your VIN.

Now, I didn't go that far, but that's what I saw.

Speeker

"tcrewe" > wrote in message
...
> Is there a WEBSITE that anyone knows of where I can check my 2000 DAKOTA
> P/U
> Or do I just call Daimler Canada ??
>
> "Dan J.S." > wrote in message
> ...
>> MoPar Man wrote:
>> > NOTE: lots of posts dating back to 2000/2001 in alt.autos.dodge.trucks
>> > about premature wear and failure of upper ball joints in
>> > Durango/Dakota. It's about time DC did something about this. Problem
>> > is, seems it should include '96-'99 vehicles as well.
>> >
>> > I remember a newspaper article about a guy that went to DC to get them
>> > to repair the dammage caused by a wheel that flipped out because it
>> > came out of the ball joint. I think at first DCX refused, then they
>> > said they would if signed an agreement that he would never publicize
>> > the incident. He refused and had a private garage repair it and then
>> > he went public.
>> >
>> > DC definately gets a black eye over this one. So much for customer
>> > service...
>>
>> Whats even worse, is some idiot on this newsgroup defended the ball
>> joints... i had to replace mine 3 times on my 98 Durango. I sold the
> Durango
>> and got a 2003 4 runner. 0 problems for the two years that I owned it.
>>
>>
>
>

I was looking at www.4adodge.com and there is a box to click search. Put in
the word recall, and then it takes you to another page where you can enter
the last few letters/numbers of your VIN.

Now, I didn't go that far, but that's what I saw.

Speeker

Is there a WEBSITE that anyone knows of where I can check my 2000 DAKOTA P/U
Or do I just call Daimler Canada ??

"Dan J.S." > wrote in message
...
> MoPar Man wrote:
> > NOTE: lots of posts dating back to 2000/2001 in alt.autos.dodge.trucks
> > about premature wear and failure of upper ball joints in
> > Durango/Dakota. It's about time DC did something about this. Problem
> > is, seems it should include '96-'99 vehicles as well.
> >
> > I remember a newspaper article about a guy that went to DC to get them
> > to repair the dammage caused by a wheel that flipped out because it
> > came out of the ball joint. I think at first DCX refused, then they
> > said they would if signed an agreement that he would never publicize
> > the incident. He refused and had a private garage repair it and then
> > he went public.
> >
> > DC definately gets a black eye over this one. So much for customer
> > service...
>
> Whats even worse, is some idiot on this newsgroup defended the ball
> joints... i had to replace mine 3 times on my 98 Durango. I sold the
Durango
> and got a 2003 4 runner. 0 problems for the two years that I owned it.
>
>

Is there a WEBSITE that anyone knows of where I can check my 2000 DAKOTA P/U
Or do I just call Daimler Canada ??

"Dan J.S." > wrote in message
...
> MoPar Man wrote:
> > NOTE: lots of posts dating back to 2000/2001 in alt.autos.dodge.trucks
> > about premature wear and failure of upper ball joints in
> > Durango/Dakota. It's about time DC did something about this. Problem
> > is, seems it should include '96-'99 vehicles as well.
> >
> > I remember a newspaper article about a guy that went to DC to get them
> > to repair the dammage caused by a wheel that flipped out because it
> > came out of the ball joint. I think at first DCX refused, then they
> > said they would if signed an agreement that he would never publicize
> > the incident. He refused and had a private garage repair it and then
> > he went public.
> >
> > DC definately gets a black eye over this one. So much for customer
> > service...
>
> Whats even worse, is some idiot on this newsgroup defended the ball
> joints... i had to replace mine 3 times on my 98 Durango. I sold the
Durango
> and got a 2003 4 runner. 0 problems for the two years that I owned it.
>
>

I entered mine : VS281497 nothing happened
>
> I was looking at www.4adodge.com and there is a box to click search. Put
> in the word recall, and then it takes you to another page where you can
> enter the last few letters/numbers of your VIN.
>
> Now, I didn't go that far, but that's what I saw.
>
> Speeker
>