e-Torque, an interesting article

[kt4hx]

Like many I am following the great debate about whether to go with a 2026 (and beyond) hemi with e-Torque or with the Hurricane. I have not made a decision yet, but frankly I am not fully confident in either option. By posting this article I am not trying to stir the pot, but I did find it interesting and informative. and hopefully so with some others. For now, I am also waiting to see what all the big improvements being promised for Chevy/GMC trucks for 2027 will be. Just keeping my options open

Ram eTorque Problems: What Every Truck Owner Needs to Know

If you're dealing with Ram eTorque problems, you're probably frustrated and worried about repair costs. The mild hybrid system that Ram introduced in 2019 has created headaches for thousands of truck owners nationwide. From sudden

cartipsdaily.com

 

[RamDiver]

Like many I am following the great debate about whether to go with a 2026 (and beyond) hemi with e-Torque or with the Hurricane. I have not made a decision yet, but frankly I am not fully confident in either option. By posting this article I am not trying to stir the pot, but I did find it interesting and informative. and hopefully so with some others. For now, I am also waiting to see what all the big improvements being promised for Chevy/GMC trucks for 2027 will be. Just keeping my options open

That is an interesting read, but I suspect some creative license has been used to stretch suspicions into facts.

I would like to see the actual stats used to derive some of these conclusions before accepting them as anything beyond strong suspicions.

That said, I wouldn't accept an e-junk truck for free. And as far as any of the more recent trucks that utilize the Atlantis High electrical architecture, those would be a hard pass for me, too.

I would want to see several years of reliable service with almost zero catastrophic failures before even giving them a second look.
Anything that updates over the air is questionable.
My next truck will likely be a 2020-2021 Ram Hemi, no e-junk.

My background is electronics and Telecom. I have a clue about how both these systems function, and we all know how well Stellantis has supported this junk to date.
Why would that change?

.

 

[kt4hx]

That is an interesting read, but I suspect some creative license has been used to stretch suspicions into facts.

I would like to see the actual stats used to derive some of these conclusions before accepting them as anything beyond strong suspicions.

That said, I wouldn't accept an e-junk truck for free. And as far as any of the more recent trucks that utilize the Atlantis High electrical architecture, those would be a hard pass for me, too.

I would want to see several years of reliable service with almost zero catastrophic failures before even giving them a second look.
Anything that updates over the air is questionable.
My next truck will likely be a 2020-2021 Ram Hemi, no e-junk.

My background is electronics and Telecom. I have a clue about how both these systems function, and we all know how well Stellantis has supported this junk to date.
Why would that change?

Thanks Michael. I would not be surprised if some license was indeed utilized, as is more often than not the case. I do suspect the general theme of the article is on the right track. I too am more and more reluctant to bite on the e-Torque system. I cannot see any benefits for the user to make it worth the added complexity and failure potential, coupled with the very obvious supply issues.

As you mentioned, the Atlantis High architecture is another point of contention that should be of concern for buyers. Whether they are working "diligently" to iron out the quirks and problems with the platform, one can only hope at best. But in a broad sense, I am a bit uneasy about the path they are headed down.

I fully understand the thoughts about getting an e-junkless hemi. My 2019 classic with hemi is running fine and serving me well. I just would like a few more bells and whistles - such as heated seats and steering wheel to name a couple. I would be fine with the 8.4 display and plenty of actual buttons to push rather than a touchscreen. I too come from a electronics/telecom background with the Feds and know that over-complexity has its way of creating issues. I have been looking at used from 2019 to 2022 for quite a while, and most assuredly without the e-junk. If I am reluctant to buy a new truck with it, I would certainly not buy a used one that has it as it is just that much closer to failure.

 

[mikeru]

That is an interesting read, but I suspect some creative license has been used to stretch suspicions into facts.

I would like to see the actual stats used to derive some of these conclusions before accepting them as anything beyond strong suspicions.

That said, I wouldn't accept an e-junk truck for free. And as far as any of the more recent trucks that utilize the Atlantis High electrical architecture, those would be a hard pass for me, too.

I would want to see several years of reliable service with almost zero catastrophic failures before even giving them a second look.
Anything that updates over the air is questionable.
My next truck will likely be a 2020-2021 Ram Hemi, no e-junk.

My background is electronics and Telecom. I have a clue about how both these systems function, and we all know how well Stellantis has supported this junk to date.
Why would that change?

.

The author of the article definitely seems to be biased against etorque, but I’m curious which facts you suspect that creative license has been used and what you’re basing those suspicions on? Etorque problems are one of the two or three biggest issues 5th gen owners complain about. And based on the number of people I’ve seen post about their issues with the system in this and other Ram truck forums I think the article is closer to the truth than not.

I won’t be buying another truck with etorque. We owned two 5th gens Limited’s a few years ago, a 2021 with etorque and our current 2020 without. The 2021 was a nicer truck, with the HUD and digital rear view mirror. But I was worried enough about keeping it long term because of potential etorque issues that I traded it in after owning it for about 18 months.

 

[turkeybird56]

Like many I am following the great debate about whether to go with a 2026 (and beyond) hemi with e-Torque or with the Hurricane. I have not made a decision yet, but frankly I am not fully confident in either option. By posting this article I am not trying to stir the pot, but I did find it interesting and informative. and hopefully so with some others. For now, I am also waiting to see what all the big improvements being promised for Chevy/GMC trucks for 2027 will be. Just keeping my options open

Ram eTorque Problems: What Every Truck Owner Needs to Know

If you're dealing with Ram eTorque problems, you're probably frustrated and worried about repair costs. The mild hybrid system that Ram introduced in 2019 has created headaches for thousands of truck owners nationwide. From sudden

cartipsdaily.com

I would not touch a GM product right now with a 50 foot pole. They are going from disaster to catastrophe with their AFM/DFM ISSUES with the motors tanking and their tranny issues also. THERE was a rumor that GM was gonna redo the V8 motors and get rid of the AFM/DFM issues and put the Vortec's back out without those Improvements, make the 5.3/6.2 more reliable. Just IMHO.

 

[kt4hx]

I would not touch a GM product right now with a 50 foot pole. They are going from disaster to catastrophe with their AFM/DFM ISSUES with the motors tanking and their tranny issues also. THERE was a rumor that GM was gonna redo the V8 motors and get rid of the AFM/DFM issues and put the Vortec's back out without those Improvements, make the 5.3/6.2 more reliable. Just IMHO.

I understand what you're saying. I was wondering why they are abandoning the 5.3/6.2 engines rather than refining them. I know a big point of contention with the GM trucks has been seat comfort which is important to me, and they are supposedly addressing that in 2027 (to be seen of course). I will say my Ram classic is very comfortable.

I have tried the MultiPro tailgate with the bed mounted grip handle on a Sierra 1500 and really liked it. That said, I have been looking at used Ram 1500s this evening again. Without e-Torque of course!

 

[Docwagon1776]

The author of the article definitely seems to be biased against etorque, but I’m curious which facts you suspect that creative license has been used and what you’re basing those suspicions on?

The "typical mileage range" for failures seems pretty suspect, not just due to the very linear progression and nice round numbers, but also the lack of data on how many fail. If you've got such good data you know that X widget fails at 50k miles, you know what percentage of X widgets fail at all. You'd include that data.

Unless the author is trying to claim a majority fail at those marks, which is absurd.

Unlike your standard 12-volt battery, you can’t just swap in a new one. The 48-volt pack requires complete system replacement because of integrated cooling and control electronics.

That's kind of overstating it. It has fans, so technically it has integrated cooling but it's not replacing the "whole system" to replace the battery. It's not like your plumbing into the coolant line or anything, it's still just plug and play.

 

[turkeybird56]

I understand what you're saying. I was wondering why they are abandoning the 5.3/6.2 engines rather than refining them. I know a big point of contention with the GM trucks has been seat comfort which is important to me, and they are supposedly addressing that in 2027 (to be seen of course). I will say my Ram classic is very comfortable.

I have tried the MultiPro tailgate with the bed mounted grip handle on a Sierra 1500 and really liked it. That said, I have been looking at used Ram 1500s this evening again. Without e-Torque of course!

AFM/DFM = Air Fuel management/Dynamic Fuel Management: GM's MDS, and it is absolutely horrible.

THEY R not abandoning either the 5.3 or the 6.2 . The rumor was they were going to unimagine the two big Vortec Motors and manufacture them without the AFM/DFM SYSTEMS going back to the more traditional V8 Motors without the cylinder deactivation. The 5.3/6.2 prior to the AFM/DFM systems were stout and reliable motors. The biggest complaint and why PPL moved towards the RAM was more aesthetic ref interiors and such than under the hood.

If RAM would get their head outta their 4 point corner, ditch the MDS/E-torque and go back to straight V8 and redo the VVT oiling process, they would knock it outta the park. BUT Carlos really put the kabash on stuff, and sadly, I do not see RAM being smart enough to make any changes.

 

[turkeybird56]

The author of the article definitely seems to be biased against etorque, but I’m curious which facts you suspect that creative license has been used and what you’re basing those suspicions on? Etorque problems are one of the two or three biggest issues 5th gen owners complain about. And based on the number of people I’ve seen post about their issues with the system in this and other Ram truck forums I think the article is closer to the truth than not.

I won’t be buying another truck with etorque. We owned two 5th gens Limited’s a few years ago, a 2021 with etorque and our current 2020 without. The 2021 was a nicer truck, with the HUD and digital rear view mirror. But I was worried enough about keeping it long term because of potential etorque issues that I traded it in after owning it for about 18 months.

I want a Brand New Truck: BUT, E junkola, no way. Inline 6 with (2) turbos bolted on, DI system, no way. SO leaves me with my 2019 parked out front. The Hurricane for wat I do would probably work for me, but makes no sense to trade in my paid 2019 to get a 2026 with systems I do not want/motor I do not want, have a 30K car note on a truck that stays parked 98% of the time. Not to mention the new Atlantic Architecture that they put out as cheap as possible (Thanks Carlos), now they R paying the price of trying to cheap out on the electrics to save pennies. All IMHO.

 

[mikeru]

The "typical mileage range" for failures seems pretty suspect, not just due to the very linear progression and nice round numbers, but also the lack of data on how many fail. If you've got such good data you know that X widget fails at 50k miles, you know what percentage of X widgets fail at all. You'd include that data.

Unless the author is trying to claim a majority fail at those marks, which is absurd.



That's kind of overstating it. It has fans, so technically it has integrated cooling but it's not replacing the "whole system" to replace the battery. It's not like your plumbing into the coolant line or anything, it's still just plug and play.

For me the main point of the article hits home. Etorque is not a good system and is of little benefit to the owners of those trucks. I’ve owned 5th gens with and without etorque. I saw no benefit to having etorque.

 

[mikeru]

I want a Brand New Truck: BUT, E junkola, no way. Inline 6 with (2) turbos bolted on, DI system, no way. SO leaves me with my 2019 parked out front. The Hurricane for wat I do would probably work for me, but makes no sense to trade in my paid 2019 to get a 2026 with systems I do not want/motor I do not want, have a 30K car note on a truck that stays parked 98% of the time. Not to mention the new Atlantic Architecture that they put out as cheap as possible (Thanks Carlos), now they R paying the price of trying to cheap out on the electrics to save pennies. All IMHO.

Why would you want to upgrade a perfectly good truck if you’re happy with it? I mean, who doesn’t love getting a new vehicle, but that newness only lasts a short time. But you’re still stuck with a new vehicle payment once that happens. Our 2020 Limited will be paid off next month. It was a zero interest loan so we weren’t in a hurry to pay it off lol. It’ll be nice not having that payment anymore.

 

[turkeybird56]

Why would you want to upgrade a perfectly good truck if you’re happy with it? I mean, who doesn’t love getting a new vehicle, but that newness only lasts a short time. But you’re still stuck with a new vehicle payment once that happens. Our 2020 Limited will be paid off next month. It was a zero interest loan so we weren’t in a hurry to pay it off lol. It’ll be nice not having that payment anymore.

I just redo vehicles every 5 years. When I leave dealership, between trade/etc I neva have a car loan, I work my finances etc.,. But since there is nothing out there that I would be happy with, my 2019 stays parked.

Wife had a 2010 F150 with the 5.4L Triton. Ran well, but wat a gas hog. I liked the F150, but it was HER truck, lol, (translation, keppa yer hands off MY truck). I would look at a Coyote 5.0, but Ford trannies are a disaster, so makes no sense there, heck the F150 cost even more than the RAMS, yup. Looks like no 5 year turn over for me. Since my RAM was built in April 2018, makes it 8 years old soon, so I am breaking my pattern of new every 5, lol.

ADDED: My older son has a 25 Biggyhorn. He is happy with it, but he leases his vehicles, ARGH, but he big boy, and not listen to me, ole worn out BOIRD.

 

[kt4hx]

For me the main point of the article hits home. Etorque is not a good system and is of little benefit to the owners of those trucks. I’ve owned 5th gens with and without etorque. I saw no benefit to having etorque.

That was my thinking as well. The author may not have documented where he got his stats, and could have let some personal feelings dictate his presentation. Nonetheless, for all the real and potential problems involved with the system, where are the benefits to offset the downsides? If there were some solid, real world benefits that one could point to, that might mitigate some of the complaints. However, in all honesty, I just don't see any. IMHO that is.

 

[Docwagon1776]

For me the main point of the article hits home. Etorque is not a good system and is of little benefit to the owners of those trucks. I’ve owned 5th gens with and without etorque. I saw no benefit to having etorque.

Sure, I was just answering the question asked about questionable 'facts'.

Etorque is a middle ground solution, it's the cheapest "mild hybrid" system you can design or an overdesigned stop/start system depending on which way you want to look at it. The benefit is the same as any stop/start, reduced idle emissions and marginal fuel gains in city driving. The cons are also the same, increased wear and complexity. Absent regulation, I suspect few people really want the trade off but I don't know that. I'm surprised people want driver monitoring, so maybe I'm the one who's out of touch.

If I'm going to deal with the complexity of a hybrid, I want an eRay style system. I want the electrical system to have the ability to drive at least one axle and provide real power assist. The eRay gets a 160hp bump and the instant torque off the line of electric. Give me that in an off road focused trim that's reliable. High torque decoupled from RPM for control and less chance of axle hop breaking stuff, truly beneficial off the line assist on road, that's what a useful etorque system would look like. Too bad Stellantis sucks at tech.

 

[kt4hx]

AFM/DFM = Air Fuel management/Dynamic Fuel Management: GM's MDS, and it is absolutely horrible.

THEY R not abandoning either the 5.3 or the 6.2 . The rumor was they were going to unimagine the two big Vortec Motors and manufacture them without the AFM/DFM SYSTEMS going back to the more traditional V8 Motors without the cylinder deactivation. The 5.3/6.2 prior to the AFM/DFM systems were stout and reliable motors. The biggest complaint and why PPL moved towards the RAM was more aesthetic ref interiors and such than under the hood.

My understanding is that GM was going to replace the 5.3/6.2 engines with new 5.7/6.7 models in the truck lines. But honestly I have not seen that fully confirmed. I found this article about the new MDS system they patented.

https://pickuptrucktalk.com/2026/01/new-gm-cylinder-deactivation-patent-filing-fixes-reliability-woes-coming-for-next-gen-v8-engines/

But I took special note of a paragraph near the end of it that stated:

"If this new system uses less oil, simplifies things with less parts and overall is more reliable, this should help reduce the concerns many owners have and reduce the need for them to buy kits or pay mechanics. The key word there is “should.”

As with most things the best approach to this information would be "we will see."

 

[Docwagon1776]

My understanding is that GM was going to replace the 5.3/6.2 engines with new 5.7/6.7 models in the truck lines. But honestly I have not seen that fully confirmed. I found this article about the new MDS system they patented.

https://pickuptrucktalk.com/2026/01/new-gm-cylinder-deactivation-patent-filing-fixes-reliability-woes-coming-for-next-gen-v8-engines/

But I took special note of a paragraph near the end of it that stated:

"If this new system uses less oil, simplifies things with less parts and overall is more reliable, this should help reduce the concerns many owners have and reduce the need for them to buy kits or pay mechanics. The key word there is “should.”

As with most things the best approach to this information would be "we will see."

Aren't GM's reliability problems with the 6.2L due to the crankshaft being hand finished by blind left handed children with right handed potato peelers?

 

[turkeybird56]

U know if they would just quit and get away from this Cylinder deactivation BS and go back to a straight V8, it would sure SIMPLIFY things and bring back reliability. Complicating something cause you can just neva does well, IMHO. Kinda like: don't fix it if it ain't broke. Go back to a straight push rod V8 and get rid of all the deactivation silliness. But wat do I know, I's just a BOIRD.

 

[DanAR]

Anyone hear any thing on the Tundra trucks problem areas for the last 2 years? They were suffering turbo issues when I bought my 23 RAM. But I haven’t heard much lately. I still think the bones of the Gen V are better than the Toyota but it doesn’t help when they have so many issues.

I have a history of Toyota and Lexus SUVs that has been great and trouble free. My impression is when a problem pops up on a Toyota they jump in and fix it right away. Where as it seems RAMs philosophy is just keep pumping them out and let the warranty and service shops deal with the problems (on the customers nickel). Thus perpetual valve train oiling issues, cracking exhaust manifolds, service parts shortages, software and electrical architectural problems, leaking antennas/backup lights, leaking rear windows, wrinkling up dashboard tops, etc that never seem to get corrected in new models.

 

[RamDiver]

The author of the article definitely seems to be biased against etorque, but I’m curious which facts you suspect that creative license has been used and what you’re basing those suspicions on? Etorque problems are one of the two or three biggest issues 5th gen owners complain about. And based on the number of people I’ve seen post about their issues with the system in this and other Ram truck forums I think the article is closer to the truth than not.

The author seems to know detailed information that could only be derived from very specific stats. I'm not saying they're wrong or lies, but if an unknown individual starts spouting out a detailed critique without providing any source details, that's hearsay in my books.


"You’ll first notice a high-pitched whining or grinding noise. Sounds similar to power steering problems. That noise gradually gets worse as the bearings deteriorate."

What type of an owner is going to continue driving any vehicle while it's making a high-pitched whining or grinding noise?


"Here’s the kicker: the MGU contains non-replaceable bearings. That means the entire unit gets replaced when it fails. Some mechanically inclined owners have successfully rebuilt MGUs by replacing individual bearings for about $30, but this requires serious mechanical knowledge and voids your warranty."

We know, right or wrong, that Stellantis does not repair the MGU at the dealership level, and this may be what the author is referring to, but to say the bearings are non-replaceable is, at a minimum, a grossly inaccurate statement.

Then, in the same paragraph, he contradicts himself, saying owners with serious mechanical knowledge have successfully rebuilt them.

You don't need to be a mechanical engineer to use a bearing puller and take the part to your local bearing shop for replacement.


Stellantis has seriously dropped the ball with many of these e-Torque failures, among others. For those who have not been provided with a free suitable loaner vehicle, why would they prioritize maintaining a warranty with a circus show company over repairing the vehicle themselves or with another trusted mechanic?

MGU Failure Symptoms	Typical Mileage Range
High-pitched whining noise	40,000-50,000 miles
Grinding sounds	50,000-60,000 miles
Battery not charging	60,000-70,000 miles
Complete failure	70,000+ miles

While this data looks possible, where did it originate? I would expect Stellantis to have this type of detailed stats, but like the Hemi lifter/camshaft failures, they seem to have kept it well hidden.

We see a steady flow of e-Torque faults here at Ram Forum, yet most seem to occur almost at random at any mileage. I understand that we only see a small portion of the e-Torque failures, but I see absolutely no correlation to the above.

I haven't been in the Ram world very long; maybe I'm not seeing this clearly enough, or as others who have had a lifetime with Ram trucks.


All that said, I would not be surprised if everything expressed by this author was accurate; it could be believable with statistical references.

Without references, I call it creative license.


Anyone here who knows me understands that I believe the Ram e-Torque system is a liability to own and an enormous failure from Stellantis.

.

 

[kt4hx]

The author seems to know detailed information that could only be derived from very specific stats. I'm not saying they're wrong or lies, but if an unknown individual starts spouting out a detailed critique without providing any source details, that's hearsay in my books.


"You’ll first notice a high-pitched whining or grinding noise. Sounds similar to power steering problems. That noise gradually gets worse as the bearings deteriorate."

What type of an owner is going to continue driving any vehicle while it's making a high-pitched whining or grinding noise?


"Here’s the kicker: the MGU contains non-replaceable bearings. That means the entire unit gets replaced when it fails. Some mechanically inclined owners have successfully rebuilt MGUs by replacing individual bearings for about $30, but this requires serious mechanical knowledge and voids your warranty."

We know, right or wrong, that Stellantis does not repair the MGU at the dealership level, and this may be what the author is referring to, but to say the bearings are non-replaceable is, at a minimum, a grossly inaccurate statement.

Then, in the same paragraph, he contradicts himself, saying owners with serious mechanical knowledge have successfully rebuilt them.

You don't need to be a mechanical engineer to use a bearing puller and take the part to your local bearing shop for replacement.


Stellantis has seriously dropped the ball with many of these e-Torque failures, among others. For those who have not been provided with a free suitable loaner vehicle, why would they prioritize maintaining a warranty with a circus show company over repairing the vehicle themselves or with another trusted mechanic?

MGU Failure Symptoms	Typical Mileage Range
High-pitched whining noise	40,000-50,000 miles
Grinding sounds	50,000-60,000 miles
Battery not charging	60,000-70,000 miles
Complete failure	70,000+ miles

While this data looks possible, where did it originate? I would expect Stellantis to have this type of detailed stats, but like the Hemi lifter/camshaft failures, they seem to have kept it well hidden.

We see a steady flow of e-Torque faults here at Ram Forum, yet most seem to occur almost at random at any mileage. I understand that we only see a small portion of the e-Torque failures, but I see absolutely no correlation to the above.

I haven't been in the Ram world very long; maybe I'm not seeing this clearly enough, or as others who have had a lifetime with Ram trucks.


All that said, I would not be surprised if everything expressed by this author was accurate; it could be believable with statistical references.

Without references, I call it creative license.


Anyone here who knows me understands that I believe the Ram e-Torque system is a liability to own and an enormous failure from Stellantis.

I fully understand where you are coming from on this. I suspect you may be right that even though some skilled individuals have replaced bearings in their MGU, a dealership doing that level of work on the MGU seems, well, implausible.

Stellantis most assuredly put obtaining EPA credits ahead of the well being of their customer base when they introduced e-Torque. To put total reliance on such a useless and fault prone add-on is simply poor decision making. While I understand the game of trying to avoid fines regarding EPA crap, the right thing to do is to stand by your customers and give them the best product possible. There simply isn't the level of pride of design and build that there once was when things were built to last for decades. Whether that be cars/trucks or even something as simple as kitchen appliances.