Lifter Failure? Report it here!

[mbarber84]

2019+ LIFTER FAILURE:

I’ve had quite a lot of requests to document these.
If you have had a lifter failure, I’d like to record your trucks information. The goal here is to see how many of these failures have occurred, as well as document basic data surrounding the failure. You can open the form to view it prior to filling it out, that way you can see if there’s information you need to collect prior to filling it out and submitting it. I’ll be using this reporting form to gather data. I will transpose the information onto a publicly viewable spreadsheet as the forms get submitted. Any questions or feedback please comment below.

You can find the form at this link:

2019+ RAM HD 6.7 Cummins Lifter / Cam Failures Data Tracking: Reporting Form

The purpose of this form is to document and track the number of confirmed lifter failures experienced in 2019 and up Ram HD trucks with the 6.7 Cummins engine. Please submit your information. The results will be posted on a separate Google Sheets spreadsheet and posted for public viewing...

forms.gle

You can view the spreadsheet results here:
Lifter Failure Spreadsheet

 

[Ostracize]

2019+ LIFTER FAILURE:

I’ve had quite a lot of requests to document these.
If you have had a lifter failure, I’d like to record your trucks information. The goal here is to see how many of these failures have occurred, as well as document basic data surrounding the failure. You can open the form to view it prior to filling it out, that way you can see if there’s information you need to collect prior to filling it out and submitting it. I’ll be using this reporting form to gather data. I will transpose the information onto a publicly viewable spreadsheet as the forms get submitted. Any questions or feedback please comment below.

You can find the form at this link:

2019+ RAM HD 6.7 Cummins Lifter / Cam Failures Data Tracking: Reporting Form

The purpose of this form is to document and track the number of confirmed lifter failures experienced in 2019 and up Ram HD trucks with the 6.7 Cummins engine. Please submit your information. The results will be posted on a separate Google Sheets spreadsheet and posted for public viewing...

forms.gle

Thank you for doing this sir. Form submitted for mine. It's in the shop right now so I'll update once the repair is complete and I get it back.

 

[Ostracize]

Cam & lifters replaced. Tick is gone. The mildly concerning part is that there is no obvious smoking gun on the old components... So time will tell if it stays gone.
Everything else that was able to be inspected looked really good, so Yay for that.

 

[flan]

If mine goes down after August I’ll be ripping out the motor and doing a solid lifter conversion. These hydraulic lifters are a fix for a problem that didnt exist.

 

[Ostracize]

If mine goes down after August I’ll be ripping out the motor and doing a solid lifter conversion. These hydraulic lifters are a fix for a problem that didnt exist.

Yeah after warranty it's solids for me as well

 

[mbarber84]

Flat tappet is the way to go.
Eliminate the roller completely and go back to what was tried and true. “Lifter failure” was utterly unheard of on these engines when they had no rollers.

 

[Trash Panda]

I don’t understand how Cummins could be so inept at designing a roller lifter.

Roller lifters are in motors all over the place, and they last hundreds of thousands of miles. The failure is truly baffling.

 

[Ostracize]

I don’t understand how Cummins could be so inept at designing a roller lifter.

Roller lifters are in motors all over the place, and they last hundreds of thousands of miles. The failure is truly baffling.

Completely hyperbolic... But I find it interesting that only the consumer engines adopted rollers. ISB commercial engines did not. Why? NVH and stellantis's choice to attempt deal with it. If rollers were needed for any other reason we'd see them in more cummins offerings. I personally think stellantis asked cummins for a solution they wanted, cummins obliged. Both are to blame.

 

[mbarber84]

Completely hyperbolic... But I find it interesting that only the consumer engines adopted rollers. ISB commercial engines did not. Why? NVH and stellantis's choice to attempt deal with it. If rollers were needed for any other reason we'd see them in more cummins offerings. I personally think stellantis asked cummins for a solution they wanted, cummins obliged. Both are to blame.

This is my understanding of it as well. They also get to remove the 150k valve overhead maintenance point as well. Not as “big” of a deal as the reduction in NVH, but an “improvement” nonetheless. NVH is also why the 2019+ pickups have the scissor gear on the cam gear. It’s also interesting to note that the hydraulic lifters themselves are a Stellantis-only sourced part. They are not available through Cummins, unlike most other parts on the engine.

 

[H3LZSN1P3R]

I don’t understand how Cummins could be so inept at designing a roller lifter.

Roller lifters are in motors all over the place, and they last hundreds of thousands of miles. The failure is truly baffling.

Thats RAM not cummins same with the CP4 fiasco,

 

[Trash Panda]

Thats RAM not cummins same with the CP4 fiasco,

Cummins designed the lifters. Cummins tested the lifters. Cummins put their names on the lifters. Cummins released the lifters into service. Stellantis asking for less NVH is well within their right as a customer who has bought millions of engines all over the years.

Hyperbolic? There are engine manufactures all over the world that run rollers quite successfully, in both gas & diesel engines, and it’s a time tested design. No hyperbole there whatsoever.

 

[mbarber84]

Cummins designed the lifters. Cummins tested the lifters. Cummins put their names on the lifters. Cummins released the lifters into service. Stellantis asking for less NVH is well within their right as a customer who has bought millions of engines all over the years.

Hyperbolic? There are engine manufactures all over the world that run rollers quite successfully, in both gas & diesel engines, and it’s a time tested design. No hyperbole there whatsoever.

The lifters are a Stellantis part. They are not available through Cummins. Its also worth noting that those lifters have been “revised” at least three times from 2019 to the current model year.

 

[Trash Panda]

The lifters are a Stellantis part. They are not available through Cummins. Its also worth noting that those lifters have been “revised” at least three times from 2019 to the current model year.

Oh, I understand that.

It was just my understanding that they are a Cummins designed & built part, that is only available through stellantis. Unless I’m mistaken?

 

[mbarber84]

Oh, I understand that.

It was just my understanding that they are a Cummins designed & built part, that is only available through stellantis. Unless I’m mistaken?

I have been trying to find the answer to that question but have had no success so far. You’ll see opposing information passed out around the web. In theory, I would expect Cummins to supply the lifter and assemble it at their factory. But the part itself is only available through Ram / Mopar when buying replacements. (Technically Cummins can’t sell you anything for the FCA-bound engines anyway). I would like to be a fly on the wall when the two parties meet regarding these lifter failures. It’s been a problem for some time now, and the fact that the lifters themselves have been slightly changed over time would lead me to believe they’re investigating and changing to improve. Either that, or there are three different suppliers for the lifter components and each is slightly different. There have been a number of engines that were opened up, only to find different styles within the same engine.

 

[IndyRamMega]

Flat tappet is the way to go.
Eliminate the roller completely and go back to what was tried and true. “Lifter failure” was utterly unheard of on these engines when they had no rollers.

theres nothing wrong with rollers...they just have to stay straight in the bore and not rotate which is only 1 piece to this 2 part problem....

 

[mbarber84]

theres nothing wrong with rollers...they just have to stay straight in the bore and not rotate which is only 1 piece to this 2 part problem....

While I agree that’s the theory, the practical application is much more difficult to achieve. If the flat tappet arrangement had some realistic drawback that the rollers fixed, I would be more apt to accept them as the revised version, however that’s simply not the case. Untold Millions upon millions of miles logged on the flat tapper 5.9 & 6.7 without issues. Lifter failure was unheard of in the engine platform prior to the introduction of hydraulic lifters. It was an unnecessary change, and one that added complexity, rather than taking it away. The hallmark of the Cummins platform has always been simplicity and robustness. The switch to hydraulic roller lifters added complexity and more fragile components to a system that never before had issues. Hydraulic lifters weren’t needed. It was done solely to satisfy NVH requirements. It was a poor trade off, and one that has now created more issues. Even in terms of maintenance, the hydraulic lifters have not made anything better. Lost the need for overhead valve adjustment but gained an expensive and time consuming process for changing the lifters out in-frame.

 

[Ostracize]

theres nothing wrong with rollers...they just have to stay straight in the bore and not rotate which is only 1 piece to this 2 part problem....

I'd slightly disagree... And agree.
The staying straight in the bore is an issue some have seen, another separate issue is not staying pumped up to close lash at idle oil pressure. My opinion is based on the design changes to the lifters that have been noted. I will concede that these changes could simply be supplier based changes but I don't think that holds much water because to my knowledge these lifters specifically are not used in any other applications. So my assumption is that they are changing designs to try and address premature failures... That said one feature that has not changed is the bore key..yet atleast. What has changed is the oiling channels around the body of that key, which have actually been removed from the original design that did have them. As to specifically why, what, or how this change has been motivated, it's conjecture at this point due to a pure lack of inside info. FWIW I chose to replace mine with all "smooth bore" no oiling channel around the bore key. Thankfully my dealer was willing to work with me once I showed/explained the situation. My tick is gone but will it stay gone.... No way to know currently.

 

[mbarber84]

I'd slightly disagree... And agree.
The staying straight in the bore is an issue some have seen, another separate issue is not staying pumped up to close lash at idle oil pressure. My opinion is based on the design changes to the lifters that have been noted. I will concede that these changes could simply be supplier based changes but I don't think that holds much water because to my knowledge these lifters specifically are not used in any other applications. So my assumption is that they are changing designs to try and address premature failures... That said one feature that has not changed is the bore key..yet atleast. What has changed is the oiling channels around the body of that key, which have actually been removed from the original design that did have them. As to specifically why, what, or how this change has been motivated, it's conjecture at this point due to a pure lack of inside info. FWIW I chose to replace mine with all "smooth bore" no oiling channel around the bore key. Thankfully my dealer was willing to work with me once I showed/explained the situation. My tick is gone but will it stay gone.... No way to know currently.

Agreed.
The “smooth” lifters are, AFAIK, the latest revision of the design. As far as application, I too am of the understanding that these lifters are proprietary to this series of FCA-bound engines and are not used anywhere else. What I find very shocking is that it has been demonstrated that the roller itself can be seized by even the slightest amount of hand pressure applied from a side-loading angle. While that should never be the case, it’s pretty clear that some of these rollers are rotating axial within their bores. The machined notch in the block looks large enough, compared to the key in the lifter body, that some side to side rotation would be possible. Mix that with a lifter that is not properly pressurizing (oil passages are comparatively small versus other designs) and you have a problem.

Its also worth noting that some of the early lifter failures could be attributable to two factors:

1. Was the misapplication of 15w40 engine oil
2. Was a poorly programmed warm up strategy that was hard on the rotating assemblies and the valve train.

Both were rectified by mid / late 2020.

 

[elephantrider]

there is definitely more than 1 supplier in the mix. that's procurement / supply chain 101. especially at those volumes.

 

[Ostracize]

there is definitely more than 1 supplier in the mix. that's procurement / supply chain 101. especially at those volumes.

I think everybody understands that. The only point made about supply chain is that if the differences we're seeing iteratively in these roller lifters are from the different supply chain aspects then that could make sense but, these lifters aren't used in any other applications so then the question is why are there design feature changes? That's why some, including myself, believe that these changes are for a reason outside of supply chain differences.