Ram 1500 Class Action Lawsuit Alleges Hurricane Engine Defect Causes Sudden Power Loss

Manufacturer allegedly knew about defect that could cause vehicles to stall and experience other power and safety issues, yet failed to disclose the problem.

Two 2025 Ram 1500 owners have filed a class action lawsuit, alleging their trucks suffered repeated stalling, warning messages, battery and safety system issues, as well as sudden power loss due to a defective control module.

The complaint (PDF) was brought by Charlene Norberg and Tim Craig, individually and on behalf of other vehicle owners, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan on August 25, naming FCA U.S. LLC as the sole defendant.

Plaintiffs claim FCA knew the engine or powertrain control module was defective, but failed to disclose the problem or provide an adequate repair despite being aware of the resulting safety risks.

Ram 1500 Hurricane Engine

Both Norberg and Craig’s Ram 1500 trucks were equipped with the Hurricane, a 3.0-liter, twin-turbocharged inline-six engine designed to provide the horsepower and torque traditionally associated with larger V8 engines while improving fuel efficiency.

The Hurricane was introduced as part of FCA’s shift toward smaller, more efficient powertrains, replacing older V8 options in some vehicles, including certain Ram 1500 trucks.

However, some models equipped with the 3.0-liter Hurricane engine have been associated with reports of cooling system, software calibration and high-stress component problems. Reported mechanical issues include allegations of thermostat failures, catalytic converter overheating and problems involving the fuel system, bearings and oil. Owners have also made claims of false misfire codes, parasitic battery drain and fuel octane sensitivity.

Hurricane Engine Safety Risk Allegations

According to the complaint, Norberg, of Wisconsin, bought a new 2025 Ram 1500 truck in August 2024. Within six months, she claims the vehicle stalled multiple times without notice or warning. After taking it to a dealership, technicians allegedly could not find anything wrong, and no repairs were made.

Norberg continued to experience the issue, along with battery drainage that eventually led to the replacement of the drivetrain control module. However, the vehicle displayed an engine overheating warning and became extremely hot shortly after the replacement, resulting in it being towed back to the dealership.

Craig, of Florida, purchased a 2025 Ram 1500 in May 2025. A few months later, the dashboard displayed a message that all of the vehicle’s safety features were no longer active. After taking the vehicle to a dealership, it was held for more than a month for testing and eventually received a brake booster replacement after technicians were unable to identify the problem.

In the filing, plaintiffs identified more than 100 reports of similar complaints made to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), YouTube videos, consumer forums and other websites.

Norberg and Craig allege their vehicles’ Hurricane engines suffer from a defect in the control and calibration system, including the engine control module, powertrain control module, associated sensors and related software programming and calibration strategies. 

Plaintiffs indicate the alleged defect could present a serious safety risk. Vehicles that unexpectedly lose power, stall or enter limp mode while in traffic expose drivers and passengers to an increased risk of collision, particularly at highway speeds or during acceleration.

“As a consequence of Defendant’s actions and inaction, Class Vehicle owners have been deprived of the benefit of their bargain, lost full use of their Class Vehicles, incurred lost time and out-of-pocket costs.“

— Charlene Norberg et al. v. FCA U.S. LLC

The lawsuit claims the defendant knew or should have known of the defect through pre-production testing, warranty claims and field reports, dealership service records, diagnostic trouble code frequency analysis, customer complaints and internal quality tracking systems.

Despite this knowledge, FCA allegedly failed to disclose the defect to consumers at the time of sale and continues to market the vehicles as safe, reliable and suitable for their intended use.

The complaint raises allegations of violations of Wisconsin’s Deceptive Trade Practices Act and Florida’s Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act, as well as breach of implied warranty, fraudulent concealment and unjust enrichment. It seeks class action certification, an order barring FCA from unlawful business practices, disgorgement of profits, statutory and punitive damages, civil penalties, attorney fees, costs, interest and other relief deemed just and proper by the court.

Sign up for more legal news that could affect you or your family.