Add in ZF supported transmission programming and the Renegade may be what we see as the future of the Cherokee and other AWD vehicles from FCA.

Mike

 

It's early yet....

I hope this is a better choice than what we see on the Cherokee. Time will tell!

 

It would be good at this point for Chrysler to either hire a few highly paid and highly competent software engineers, if not already done, or to outsource it... I dislike outsourcing in general but in some cases it's necessary, and I am not impressed with the shortcuts in the programming in my eight-speed or with the many problem reports for early nine-speeds.

 

What are you seeing that causes your shortcuts comment on the 8-speed, Dave?

 

Periodic harsh shifting, mainly. Bump-downs - hit the gas a bit and wham! it lurches into gear. Not too common but it happens. Original transmission fluid. Maybe there's a problem with it but I suspect from its behavior most of the time, that it's just software. We had similar issues with our four-speed 300M but not as often.

I also wish they'd go back and upgrade the firmware so it downshifts more rapidly, I know it sounds like a contradiction, but when I floor it, I want it to downshift right freakin’ now, not when it feels like it. That seems to be a feature reserved for V8s.

PS> Yes, the Cherokee AWD is going to truly haunt Jeep’s reputation in years to come, I suspect. They can’t switch it out fast enough for my comfort. Seems like every time the former Chrysler Corp. attracts a large number of new customers, they also alienate them somehow...

 

Isn't the system in the Cherokee made by AAM?

 

Part of it.

 

Does anyone have an opinion on these two systems? I am familiar with GKN, they used to make front axles for some Chrysler products.

 

Let's see what happens first

Mike

 

Is the GKN system of the non-canine variety?

 

No. It has dog clutches also. fiat fingers were kept out of it.

 

I assume then that AAM and ZF did not have this kind of a relationship?

 

You had fiat buying parts and thinking they were smart enough to make the parts work together.

They weren't.

 

Too bad also. They didn't have to go down this path.

Oh well. The person responsible got what he deserved. As will the rest of them in time.

 

...and you'd be wrong. There were NO "Chrysler" people involved in the decision.

The AAM system is not bad...it is less expensive and more durable on its own when compared to the GKN.

The difference is in the cooperation between ZF and GKN versus fiat's fingers in the pie on programming.

 

...and you'd be wrong. There were NO "Chrysler" people involved in the depiction.

The AAM system is not bad...it is less expensive and more durable on its own when compared to the GKN.

The differ ewe nice is in the cooperation between ZF and GKN versus fiat's fingers in the pie on programming.

So you are telling me that not one engineer or anyone else from Chrysler was involved in this undertaking to make this system work in this platform? Everyone involved were all from Fiat?

 

I would continue to speculate that in the whole world there are not many more than fifty people who have both formal education and hands-on experience in both planetary gearsets [especially nested ones] and computer design. Of those perhaps as many as eight work for NASA. The rest are spread pretty thinly in the automotive industry --- I don't think any are in management.

 

There are many other industries that use planetary gear drive systems with many more gear ratios than the 9 speed. CNH used a 6spd power shift transmission with three ranges and reverse shifted by computer controlled dog clutches at least 15 years ago. Just because it is new in the auto industry does not mean it has not been used elsewhere.

 

A female friend is currently shopping for a new SUV to replace her Ford Exploder V6 because the valve seals have gone south. I told her to
at least take a look at the Renegade and Cherokee, but after reading this, it looks like they are not worth buying yet, at least in AWD trim, until this new system replaces the Fiat designed AWD system. Correct?

 

No. The GKN system will not be installed in Cherokee.

 

And AC TC's point leads into my thought, I don't know for sure, but is it really fair to blame the software author?

Or is it the fault of the engineers providing the data and parameters to the software engineer, and their decisions for how the software should react? If the software was full of bugs, and TCM's froze up, software errors, yea, I'd blame the software engineer. But, I can see the software engineer saying, "There is nothing wrong with my software, it does exactly what the transmission engineers told me to make it do".

I'm guessing there was a team put together, with a variety of specialist working together to produce the software, its the team's fault NOT just the guy that wrote the code in the TCM. Cause the code might be perfectly fine, garbage in equals garbage out, blame the guy or the team that produced the garbage they put in the software.

Yea, ideally one person could design and test everything and write the software as well, its too specialized. You do see technical professionals learning enough about the related fields that they can work together as a team and communicate the different requirements, limitations and goals to produce a product together. Of course if one of them doesn't do their job, it makes the others look bad as well.

 

You really need somebody who understands how all the parts, including programming, work together to end the finger-pointing and engineer the fix. Simpson might have been that guy for the Hydramatic.

 

Understanding how all the parts, including programming, work together does NOT mean that he can actually do every task involved in engineering, testing, mass producing the product or the solution. Ideally, this is the guy that should be promoted to manager, to manage all the specialized folks that can do every task involved in their specialty, but only have a general understanding of the related specialties.

Which do you think will be a better car?
The one designed by one guy who understands how all the parts work together?
The one designed by a team, managed well, all working together to bring together their specialized skills efficiently?

One guy could bring you a '57 Bel Air for $40,000.
A well managed team of specialist could bring you a Hellcat for $60,000.

 

Apples and oranges guys. The HEAD of the team was canned. poopies rolls downhill. No one said he was the only one canned.

He wasn't.

This was a screwup from the top down and no dancing around that little fact is going to alter that.

Everyone screwed up except the 3 guys from the outside.

You all may not like it. You may want to argue. You may deny that it all happened.

It doesnt matter.

 

Apples and oranges guys. The HEAD of the team was canned. poopies rolls downhill. No one said he was the only one canned.

He wasn't.

This was a screwup from the top down and no dancing around that little fact is going to alter that.

Everyone screwed up except the 3 guys from the outside.

You all may not like it. You may want to argue. You may deny that it all happened.

It doesnt matter.

Wow, just wow. Not at you at all Bob, but at the fact that the errors happened at all, and in the magnitude we are starting to see.

I just ordered 2 9 speeds today. KL and UF...

 

Bob do you see the Cherokee getting a ZF AWD system in the future or at least using ZF firmware vs. FCA Firmware?

 

2nd time. No. No way. No how.

 

Thanks sorry for missing the first time you said no.

 

So what would be the best solution to a problem like this?

Would it be possible to give ZF (and/or anyone else) a call and beg them for help?

I guess my question for Mr. Sheaves should be this: what would you do to rectify the situation if you were the "Grand Poobay" (try to ignore the fact that you wouldn't have made the mistake in the first place lol).

There must be a solution...no doubt that it would cost FCA a fortune.

 

So what would be the best solution to a problem like this?

Would it be possible to give ZF (and/or anyone else) a call and beg them for help?

I guess my question for Mr. Sheaves should be this: what would you do to rectify the situation if you were the "Grand Poobay" (try to ignore the fact that you wouldn't have made the mistake in the first place lol).

There must be a solution...no doubt that it would cost FCA a fortune.

Not enough money to get me involved now. THAT ship is sunk. They made their bed, now they get to lie in it.

 

Dog Tooth Type "Engagement" Systems Have Always Been a Pain for Maintenance Dept's on Production Machines.
Even Ones With Only 2-Speeds.
Something Like These Have to Be an Infinite Times More a Pain!

 

Dog Tooth Type "Engagement" Systems Have Always Been a Pain for Maintenance Dept's on Production Machines.

Not to mention a pain for operators.
There use in this fashion is very rare...for a reason...

 

Apologies to Paul Hardcastle and all Veterans


In 2014, the ZF seemed like
Just another foreign transmission
But it wasn't, it was
Different in many ways

As so were those
who did the tuning
In 2010
The average number of gears
in transmissions was six

In the Cherokee, it was 9 speed
In the Cherokee, it was 9 speed
In the Cherokee, it was 9 speed
In the Cherokee, it was 9 speed
N-n-n-n-9 speed

I really wasn't sure
What was going on

N-n-n-n-9 speed, 9 speed
N-9 speed, 9 speed

All those who remember the ZF
They won't forget what they've seen
Destruction of vehicles in their prime
Because of the 9 speed

 

UMMMMM ok...

 

In case we blame Chrysler or FIAT for all the woes of the world, remember that the "vanilla" ZF 9-speed also has rough-shifting problems when fitted to the Range Rover Evoque. RR were made to recall about 36,000 of these in China to "improve the programming" and change the fluid.

FCA have improvements to make in shift-quality, but something has to come from the boys and girls in Friedrichshafen too, because this doesn't appear to be a problem caused solely by Chrysler's modifications.

 

But FCA is responsible for the transmission choice and implementation. Someone with a Cherokee that shifts poorly is not going to be consoled because the Range Rover has issues too.

 

I understand that FCA bought in the mechanical design without the control software, but even with ZF's own software there are similar complaints of rough shifting. This suggests a common cause, and something that you can mask, but not eliminate, with software changes.

 

Agreed, but still irrelevent to this situation.

 

I have seen problems in both. The most recent Cherokees seem to have the problem fixed. Fingers crossed on the Renegade

 

Could be because they just need time.....

 

My understanding is that when FCA took the ZF 9-speed design and made it more suited to "mass production" they also cheapened many of the internal parts.

When Chrysler, under Cerberus, did the same for the ZF 8-speed, they did not change as much while keeping durability and quality at the forefront
(I am told that Jim Press lobbied heavily to avoid a repeat of Chrysler's transmission issues [a top request from dealers] and chose higher cost over lower quality)

To be fair, under Cerberus, engineering was thin and changes to the ZF design would have been difficult. FCA decided to nearly completely redesign the ZF 9-speed.

Lastly, Marchionne actually wanted the 9-speed to be built in Italy as he doubted Kokomo could be revamped quickly enough.

 

IDK, I think it's going to take something more than bit twiddling to resolve this problem. After looking at the complaints logged on the NHTSA, both the Cherokee and 200 have an inordinate number of power train problem reported. It seems like... if they haven't made internal changes to this 9-speed, Renegades will have the same issues.

I would assume if the replacement transmission has the same part number as the bad one, no changes have been made.