2018 DODGE DURANGO — Problems, Recalls & Safety Data

FORMAL COMPLAINT Safety Recall 94B (NHTSA Campaign No. 24V-838) I hereby submit this complaint regarding the failure to properly complete Safety Recall 94B (NHTSA Campaign No. 24V-838) involving the HCU/ABS module on my 2018 Dodge Durango. On December 23, 2025, I contacted an authorized Dodge dealer located at 5404 S. Illinois Route 31, Crystal Lake, IL 60012, to remedy the HCU/ABS defect under the recall. I was informed that the recall repair would be performed free of charge and an appointment was scheduled for December 29, 2025. At the scheduled visit, the vehicle was returned to me in less than 30 minutes without any recall repair being performed. Instead, I was told that paid diagnostics were required and that the estimated repair cost could range from $3,000 to $5,000. I was also informed that the recall repair could not be completed because the HCU/ABS module was not in stock. The dealer later stated that the module would be ordered, but the delivery timeline was repeatedly postponed. On January 27, 2026, the vehicle was returned to me with the same HCU/ABS-related malfunctions. The dealer stated that Recall 24V-838 / FCA 94B had been closed and refused to replace the HCU/ABS module under the recall. Although FCA systems reflect the recall as “completed,” the safety defect has not been remedied. The vehicle continues to display ABS/ESC warnings, and diagnostic trouble codes related to the braking and electronic stability control systems remain present, confirming that the defect described in the recall persists. Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 30118(b) and 49 CFR § 573.6(c)(10), when a safety defect persists or reoccurs after recall repairs, the manufacturer is required to implement additional corrective measures, including repeat repair or replacement of the affected component or system. Closing a recall while the defect remains unresolved does not satisfy federal requirements. I respectfully request regulatory review and appropriate action to ensure that thi

FORMAL COMPLAINT Safety Recall 94B (NHTSA Campaign No. 24V-838) I hereby submit this complaint regarding the failure to properly complete Safety Recall 94B (NHTSA Campaign No. 24V-838) involving the HCU/ABS module on my 2018 Dodge Durango. On December 23, 2025, I contacted an authorized Dodge dealer located at 5404 S. Illinois Route 31, Crystal Lake, IL 60012, to remedy the HCU/ABS defect under the recall. I was informed that the recall repair would be performed free of charge and an appointment was scheduled for December 29, 2025. At the scheduled visit, the vehicle was returned to me in less than 30 minutes without any recall repair being performed. Instead, I was told that paid diagnostics were required and that the estimated repair cost could range from $3,000 to $5,000. I was also informed that the recall repair could not be completed because the HCU/ABS module was not in stock. The dealer later stated that the module would be ordered, but the delivery timeline was repeatedly postponed. On January 27, 2026, the vehicle was returned to me with the same HCU/ABS-related malfunctions. The dealer stated that Recall 24V-838 / FCA 94B had been closed and refused to replace the HCU/ABS module under the recall. Although FCA systems reflect the recall as “completed,” the safety defect has not been remedied. The vehicle continues to display ABS/ESC warnings, and diagnostic trouble codes related to the braking and electronic stability control systems remain present, confirming that the defect described in the recall persists. Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 30118(b) and 49 CFR § 573.6(c)(10), when a safety defect persists or reoccurs after recall repairs, the manufacturer is required to implement additional corrective measures, including repeat repair or replacement of the affected component or system. Closing a recall while the defect remains unresolved does not satisfy federal requirements. I respectfully request regulatory review and appropriate action to ensure that thi

FORMAL COMPLAINT Safety Recall 94B (NHTSA Campaign No. 24V-838) I hereby submit this complaint regarding the failure to properly complete Safety Recall 94B (NHTSA Campaign No. 24V-838) involving the HCU/ABS module on my 2018 Dodge Durango. On December 23, 2025, I contacted an authorized Dodge dealer located at 5404 S. Illinois Route 31, Crystal Lake, IL 60012, to remedy the HCU/ABS defect under the recall. I was informed that the recall repair would be performed free of charge and an appointment was scheduled for December 29, 2025. At the scheduled visit, the vehicle was returned to me in less than 30 minutes without any recall repair being performed. Instead, I was told that paid diagnostics were required and that the estimated repair cost could range from $3,000 to $5,000. I was also informed that the recall repair could not be completed because the HCU/ABS module was not in stock. The dealer later stated that the module would be ordered, but the delivery timeline was repeatedly postponed. On January 27, 2026, the vehicle was returned to me with the same HCU/ABS-related malfunctions. The dealer stated that Recall 24V-838 / FCA 94B had been closed and refused to replace the HCU/ABS module under the recall. Although FCA systems reflect the recall as “completed,” the safety defect has not been remedied. The vehicle continues to display ABS/ESC warnings, and diagnostic trouble codes related to the braking and electronic stability control systems remain present, confirming that the defect described in the recall persists. Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 30118(b) and 49 CFR § 573.6(c)(10), when a safety defect persists or reoccurs after recall repairs, the manufacturer is required to implement additional corrective measures, including repeat repair or replacement of the affected component or system. Closing a recall while the defect remains unresolved does not satisfy federal requirements. I respectfully request regulatory review and appropriate action to ensure that thi

Over time, the valvetrain in my engine became gradually louder. Because there were no check engine lights or fault codes, I initially assumed this was a normal characteristic of the engine. That changed on January 2, 2026, when I began to hear a pronounced knocking/loud tapping noise accompanied by a cylinder 8 misfire. At that point, I stopped driving the vehicle and had it towed to a repair shop. Based on the symptoms, we initially believed the issue would be limited to a camshaft and lifter replacement. However, after draining the oil and cutting open the oil filter, a significant amount of metal debris was discovered. Further inspection revealed that one camshaft lobe had been worn down nearly smooth and the corresponding lifter had failed. When the camshaft was removed for full evaluation, all other lobes showed normal, even wear. Only the lobe associated with the failed lifter exhibited catastrophic damage beyond repair. As a result of the metal contamination throughout the engine, a full engine replacement was required rather than a repair of individual components. The basis of my complaint is that this failure appears to be a well-documented and common issue with the 6.4L HEMI engine equipped with MDS. I have since reviewed numerous reports and forum discussions describing nearly identical failures—often beginning with increased valvetrain noise, followed by a single-cylinder misfire and extensive internal damage. This was not the result of neglect or abuse, but rather a known failure mode that ultimately led to the complete loss of the engine.

Manufacturer Recall Number94B NHTSA Recall Number24V-838 Recall has been active but without a solution since 2022 and reopened in 2024.