Jeep has faced its fair share of troubles of late. Oil leaks, bad transmissions, and corrosion issues have been the bane of owners in recent years. Now, it’s the Jeep Cherokee’s turn to face a recall.
As per documents filed with NHTSA, the recall applies to 63,082 Jeep Cherokees built from 2017 to 2019. The issue comes down to the power transfer unit, or PTU. Essentially, it’s the transfer case that sends drive to all four wheels in all-wheel-drive models.
Unfortunately for owners, it’s one of those ugly problems that can render the vehicle inoperable. If the PTU becomes damaged, it can become disengaged from the transmission and differential. If this happens, the vehicle may lose drive. It may also cause the effective loss of park function in the transmission—meaning the vehicle could roll away if the handbrake is not engaged.
The root cause of the issue has already been identified by Jeep. As per the recall filing, it’s all down to a simple snap ring. “An input shaft snap ring that is not fully seated may allow uncontrolled movement of the input shaft inward,” reads the notice. “Uncontrolled movement leads to the potential for wear to the range shift sleeve, spline damage, and/or range fork damage which can cause an unexpected loss of motive power or loss of PARK function while stationary.”
Simply put, if the PTU fails, the wheels and transmission are effectively no longer connected. Thus, you get no drive and no Park function.
It might appear that Jeep figured this out quickly, but it’s actually taken some time to solve this issue. NHTSA actually began its pre-investigation of this problem in April 2024. Biweekly meetings between the agency and automaker have been ongoing since August, with the recall officially issued on January 16.
It’s also worth noting that this doesn’t affect all Cherokees from model years 2017 to 2019. Some models used an alternative PTU, or had no PTU, in the case of front-wheel-drive models. According to Jeep, the issue affects three versions of the PTU—part numbers 68307403AC, 68333255AA, and 68333255AB. These PTUs all use the same input shaft snap ring—part number 68224126AA—which is the likely culprit. Sadly, Jeep didn’t issue any diagrams of the parts involved in documents submitted to NHTSA, but exploded diagrams of the parts involved are readily available online.
It’s not the first problem Jeep has had with the PTU on the Cherokee, either. In 2021, the company issued a service bulletin for problems with the input splines on earlier 2014 to 2017 models, which could fail in normal use. Indeed, that very issue is mentioned in the document listing the chronological events of the current recall, as filed with NHTSA.
Jeep was able to determine that PTUs started being built with improperly seated snap rings on October 11, 2016. This continued all the way through until February 20, 2019, when “properly seated snap rings started to be used in vehicle production,” according to Jeep. Jeep used its own records and those from supplier to determine the affected population. This implies that the issue was due to a certain population of snap rings that, for whatever reason, did not seat properly—perhaps due to dimensional abnormalities or material variances. Notably, Jeep does not mention any issues in the assembly process as a cause for this problem.
According to Jeep, a remedy for the issue is currently under development. Ultimately, it’s likely to include pulling the PTU and either replacing a snap ring or replacing the unit as a whole. Vehicles with PTUs already showing damage will almost surely gain complete replacements.
Recalls like this are a lesson in just complex the modern automobile can be. Just one small component can fail—like a cheap snap ring—and it can cause thousands of dollars of damage and render the vehicle inoperable.
Image credits: Jeep, screenshot via MyMoparParts
You would think that in 3 years someone on the line would have noticed, “Hey, that snap ring isn’t sitting right” but I guess that’s not their job.
Turns out, doing things correctly the first time is good. At least it’ll keep the USPS busy delivering the recall letters in their snazzy new duckmobiles.
Hate to break it to you, but corrosion issues are FAR from a recent Jeep problem. Come to think of it, both my 4.0L engines always seeped oil and I had to rebuild the tranny in my 1999 WJ. None of this is new.
I know the referenced article is about the aluminum panel painting issues.
We all probably agree that the NHTSA is a good thing .
How much longer will they be around before they are deemed a waste of money?/s
Depends on how many Tesla recalls are requested.
$30 for a snap-ring.
seems a little high to me, it must be packaged very nicely.
Well you can always check Amazon for the $21 version from ZYNGRBZ Ltd.
Probably 13 cents from Fastenal.
The transformation of Jeep from American to Italian is now complete.
In that sense, Jeep has always been Italian at heart.
I guess I’m a car nerd because I’ve never looked at the Catfish Cherokee as anything but an Italian car. And I’ve inherently steered clear because the Venn Diagram of Italian cars and FCA products is very much a “Here there be dragons” situation, and I’m not talking about creative use of the tailpipe.
Great call-out
Thumbs Up
Hence, the creation of the Jerrari…
I am not convinced that making the awd systems so complicated in these new little crossovers was actually a good thing. Jeep, Ford, and others have had too many complications.
I’m not convinced making all cars more complicated was actually a good thing.
Try DD a 1950s car and get back to us.
That’s taking what I said a bit extreme. I’d gladly drive a car with 1990s amenities but modern mechanical reliability.
So get a gently used 4 cyl Camry or Accord. Problem solved.
I would call this an execution and not a complexity issue. Mechanical AWD systems in your typical crossover aren’t very complicated and they often have quite similar layouts with power typically flowing: transaxle > transfer case > driveshaft > clutch > rear axle and it’s been like that for quite a while.
While there’s variety out there like having two clutches in the back replacing the single clutch and differential, a viscous coupling instead of a clutch, that clutch can be electrohydraulic, electromagnetic, there can be a driveshaft disconnect up front but even all those have been done reliably.
Oh, snap!
Ring is called “Snap”
Don’t need TSBs to try to solve them, they won’t succeed.
So peace! The recall’s wack.
But you’ll bring it back
And you don’t want that!
They’ve got the power.