2014+ Jeep Cherokee Forums banner

Cherokee Powertrain Warranty Being Reduced to Only 60k Miles

16K views 43 replies 19 participants last post by  ponbigi 
#1 ·
FCA has announced that for the 2016 model year the 100k mile powertrain warranty is being reduced to only 60k miles. The only logical conclusion for this is that they are expecting to be killed on warranty expenses, because forum members have pointed out that they were comfortable purchasing a Cherokee because of the long warranty, despite the troublesome repair records. Based upon the problems to date with the 9 speed transmission (now being installed on multiple FCA models), one has to wonder what their bean counters are projecting for warranty claims as these transmissions accumulate more mileage. The 9 speed trans seems to be the largest repair issue FCA is facing, and they certainly could have not reduced the warranty only on vehicles with this transmission or there would have been an uproar. Lucky for all of us 2014 and 2015 owners who are covered for the full 100k miles (thankfully my replacement trans was covered under warranty as the dealer told me that an out of warranty trans replacement costs $7000), but I don't see this news as being good at all.
 
#3 ·
As you said, glad to have the 100k. Sucks that new vehicles will not have this warranty. Not sure what it might do to sales, if anything, as many buyers of any vehicle don't concentrate on available manufacturers warranties...
 
#7 · (Edited)
They are all doing it
Not true, the only manufacturer that has made a similar move is GM, as the article does point out. What the article does not mention is that there are other manufacturers continuing with their 100k powertrain warranties. As you pointed out, it sends a message that is the last message they want to send at this point. But you have to wonder if it was FCA's beancounters that pointed out the projected cost of continuing it when they are seeing the actual repair rates of vehicles with far less mileage. If I were in their shoes, I would be scared too. Our friends at FCA are not stupid.
 
#8 ·
Another good reason to consider getting the lifetime Maxicare warranty. FCA will need to cover it as long as you own it.
 
#9 ·
Not saying the Maxicare warranty is not worth it, but anyone considering it should read the fine print and realize that the agreement gives the manufacturer an out. It's not really "lifetime" as is implied. And with the underlying warranty being shortened, one would expect the Maxicare price to be increasing significantly for the 2016 vehicles.
 
#11 ·
If what they would have to pay for a covered repair exceeds the value of the vehicle, all they have to do is pay you the value of the vehicle, the contract is terminated, and they have no further obligation. That's not exactly "lifetime" coverage, is it? Think about what it would cost to replace the engine or trans in one of our Cherokees (for example my dealer told me the cost to replace my trans would have been $7000 if I were out of warranty).
 
#15 ·
Said price, being a very negotiable component of the final sale price of the vehicle...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jeepster1
#18 ·
As far as the 5 year 100k mile warranty how far do you think you will drive in the 5 years more or less than the 100k? after 1 year of ownership I am turning 16k on my TH so after 5 years i might be at 80k so I should be ok for the first 5 years. After That i don't know.
 
#19 ·
I read the car and driver article and this statement is just flat out ridiculous "warranty coverage just doesn’t matter as much to customers". I exited the site after that statement. As a customer, I would rather buy a vehicle with xx amount of warranty coverage as opposed to no coverage at all. Simple as that. The more the better. In the end, it is what it is. I still have my 100k on my all 3 of my FCA's. I guess I won't be switching out anytime soon.
 
#20 ·
You're in the minority. Cars have gotten so good lately that long warranties are not much more than marketing gimmicks. Major issues tend to manifest themselves early, and little things tend not to go bad.

Thinking back since 2000 or so, I've owned 10 new vehicles and 1 used one. The only warranty claim I made on any of them was on the used one (bad 4wd on a Ranger), and that was within the original warranty. For reference, I've easily driven 300,000 miles over the last 15 years.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dawhitesTH
#22 ·
wow. have to disagree with that. engine and tranny problems have skyrocketed in the past 10 years. many fancy systems to meet government regulations and theyve caused problems. be glad jeep doesnt have direct injection. thats a another system causing alot of problems. weak piston rings for better mileage. but they arnt as good. i could go on and on.
 
#23 ·
There'll always be warranties.

Engine and transmission problems have not skyrocketed. I'm guessing you don't remember the bad old days of the '70s and '80s when cars were poorly engineered time bombs.

Issues like the Cherokee's transmission are rare. By all accounts, Jeep's expecting to replace 30,000 of them. That's a 10% failure rate, which is high.

But it also means that 90% of sleep Cherokees sold to date will be fine.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SoCalCherokee
#25 ·
Accepting your numbers at face value, 10% isn't "high". It's "huge"!. Also, don't conflate safety and reliability. Cars are *much* safer today than they were 30-40 years ago. There is arguably better design/engineering. The complexity, however, of today's vehicles is orders of magnitude higher than before.

There are a higher number of sensors and controls, and the associated computer work needed to support it. On top of that is the increased amount of software. Software complexity/bugs adds yet another potential failure.

More "things" + computer = more complexity = more opportunity for failure.
 
#26 ·
well this sux..
I may in the minority but I drive 30-35k miles a year and this was a big factor for me..
I had an 2011 Buick Enclave and then they dropped their warranty so I did not repurchase one. I buy a new vehicle evry 2 years and I try to stick wit one that has drivetrain warranty that will hold up druing that time. Especially when that vehicle like my Buick has a known fubar trans issue...
but hey that's just me
 
#27 ·
yes i remember cars from 60s, 70s, 80s etc. many more minor things. waterpumps, starters, fuel pumps belts and hoses but now many huge problems if you changed oil. many makes are having big problems today. major issues. when gm came out with 100k in 2007 they told me engines and trannys dony hardly go out anymore. talk to a gm tech. as said above alot more government stuff to get that extra mpg and it makes them happy but not good for customer.
 
#31 ·
I am gonna call bs on this gm tech. If the manufacturers pu the slightest effort into producing efficient vehicles we would not need craptacular stuff like catalytic converters... essentially burns off wasted fuel....
 
#28 ·
A 10% failure rate is huge from a PR perspective. It's not huge as far as customer impact. Jeep seems to be doing a decent job at replacing transmissions, and they'd do well to do better.

The bright side for FCA is that this is a supplier issue that's affecting other OEMs, so it's not a complete ball-drop for them.

And while today's cars are massively more complex than cars from 30 years ago, they are infinitely more reliable. That point's simply not debatable.

And yeah I get it. It sucks if you're one of the 10%.
 
#32 ·
Someone here tossed that number out, saying that a service writer relayed that FCA was expecting to replace that many.

I think that's far more than will actually be replaced, but I base that guess on nothing but my gut.
 
#30 ·
Durability of newer vehicles?? Wasn't that many years ago that you could not hardly get rid of a car with 100,000 miles. Now they are all over the place and used car lots are full of them selling for $10,000 - $20,000 every day. And I have first hand knowledge of vehicles driven daily with complete confidence with 200,000 - 300,000 miles on them. I had two jeeps that I owned and sold with over 200,000 that were still fine. In years past I would not have considered keeping a vehicle past 60,000-70,000. No comparison in longevity.
 
#40 · (Edited)
I think the big misunderstanding here is that lifetime means however long you have the car. When in reality it refers to the car's lifetime while you have the car. There is a difference. A normal person would not pay to fix a car if the fix cost more than the car is WORTH. So why would the manufacturer? It should be said we are talking about a normal everyday car here, not some kind of collectors item. At the point it costs more than the car's value to fix, it has effectively completed its useful life, and they will pay you whatever your car is worth.
 
#41 ·
I think the big misunderstanding here is that lifetime means how ever long you have the car, when in reality it refers to the cars lifetime, while you have the car. There is a difference. A normal person would not pay to fix a car if the fix cost more than the car is worth, so why would the manufacturer? It should be said we are talking about a normal everyday car here, not some kind of collectors item. At the point it costs more than the cars value to fix, it has effectively completed it's useful life and they will pay you whatever your car is worth.

This.

Did anyone really believe otherwise?
 
#43 ·
My auto insurance is essentially a lifetime warranty. They'll repair it or give me the value of the car, only in their case, they'll take the car from me.

As for the Cherokee, we don't know the long term reliability of the 9 speed ZF. That 100,000 mile warranty makes me feel better about mine, as I usually sell around that time. If I had decided to wait a few months for a 2016 (just got mine 2 weeks ago), I would have needed to factor in an extended warranty into the cost, and in that case, I may have bailed to a Grand Cherokee or 4Runner.

I like my Cherokee Trailhawk a lot, but I can't recommend it based on expected reliability. Even less so now.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top