Has it Happened

[AndySpill]

Curious, has anyone heard of or experienced a dealership denying service on a factory dual AGM battery JL simply because the owner presented the vehicle with a disconnected Aux battery and Fuse 42 setup (or, effectively the same thing, a fused jumper from N1 to N2 in the PDC)? TIA

Sponsored

 

[mwilk012]

If you do this to your jeep you should never expect anyone else to work on it. Make modifications at your own risk.

If you’re the type of person to suggest that 10,000 random idiots online also do this to your jeep, God help you.

I’m sick and tired of dealing with electrical problems and blown fuses from customers that think they can just start fucking around under the hood with zero understanding of the systems they’re messing with.

 

[Cartman]

What you expect, you made unauthorised modification, your warranty is 0,
especially battery wise...

 

[AndySpill]

Wow, for a bunch of reasons this wasn't the response I expected. Soap box ascending time.

First, the question was if someone had been denied service. But ok, posts do where posts go, and sometimes, myself included, people add tangents to the central thread question, so let's address them.

But before I do, conflict of interest statement: I have no horse in this race. I run two AGM batteries, like originally factory provided (having swapped them due to age) trickle charge, and engage ESS. But that's just me. YMMV and that's cool with me. You do you and I'll do me here.

@mwilk012, @Cartman : you make it sound like by bypassing the Aux battery, a mere cable and fuse pull, is like someone modified their JL to the extent that they've changed the propulsion system from "gasoline to hydrogen gas." Sure, dealers have every right to turn away servicing vehicles that significantly differ from stock, particularly when the repair in question touches upon the very owner modifications, having no official road map upon which to effect dealer consistent and Stellantis blessed approaches to service.

But it is precisely these genuine excuses that have been so abused by the guarantors of warranties (dealers/manufacturers) that inspired the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act (MMWA) of 1975, which, as it relates to vehicles at least, places the onus of demonstrating that the aftermarket part or modification directly caused the defect or failure for which warranty coverage is being sought. Of course enforcing that requires lawyers and money (on the part of the vehicle owner.) And sometimes, sure, the repair is not warranty related.

So @Cartman, that's actually not the law, much that practically speaking, given the cost of litigation, your statement has practical application.

And @mwilk012 , I appreciate, from the mechanic's perspective your frustration in the ignorant owner making poor or bad modifications to vehicles that make your life servicing them more difficult. But again, this isn't adding "drone wings and making the vehicle airborne, crashing, smashing up the radiator and asking you to replace it." This is an extremely mild modification, with absolutely no downstream implications, battle tested over years, and something that wouldn't be necessary if Stellantis had gotten ESS right in the first place.

You write, "If you’re the type of person to suggest that 10,000 random idiots online also do this to your jeep, God help you."

Let me clarify. I don't recommend 10,000 random idiots effect this change, I recommend that every dual AGM battery JL owner, who doesn't want to run ESS events, learn, if they can (it's not hard) to do this change or turf it out to someone who can. And this is coming from a forum member who is probably pretty far "green leaning." I'm all about limiting hydrocarbons, but not at owner expense of a crappy ESS system design.

My only trepidation is the B.S. a dealer might offer in denying service for this change that was the very impetus for this thread.

And allow me to go out on a limb and say that bypassing the Aux battery doesn't merely fail to cause a defect or failure, it outright address and corrects one. That failure was the installation of a second, dissimilar size (albeit same battery chemistry as is necessary in) parallel connected battery to regulate the voltage sensitive entertainment system during ESS events. Best practices find, unlike here, identical size and type batteries connected in parallel, and ideally, in Stellantis' case, the periodic and automatic assignment of one of those batteries as the Aux, and one as the main, switching off for even wear, that would have been prudent IMHO. Everything about this Aux battery, including its ridiculous location for service, particularly in light of the frequency with which in needs service, strikes me as engineering afterthought.

Funny, other manufacturers managed to do just fine with one battery ESS systems. From my vantage point Stellantis' solution to this entertain system problem was to put the screws to its entertainment system vendor to engineer a less voltage sensitive system as clearly must be found in other ICE vehicles running ESS on one battery, not incorporate a flawed dissimilar sized double battery solution to address it. That's solving one problem by creating another. The only thing I can say in fairness to Stellantis is that the Jeep is unique (compared to some sedan let's say running ESS ) in owner frequency of adding electrical current hungry appliances for which two batteries makes sense. But the very aftermarket addition of such power hungry things, from winches to sound systems seems best addressed by also incorporating aftermarket battery systems like Genesis offers, or some factory upgrade of same, not make every dual AGM battery JL owner have these two batteries.

So, back on track, I'm interested in hearing if someone has been, or knows someone who has been denied service based on this modification, which I personally consider as benign (provided you don't run ESS events with one battery) as "disabling the vanity mirror light."

Off soap box.

 

[Cartman]

If you interfere with the electrical system and specifically want to complain about it, it's built on its head. The manufacturer gave some kind of battery for some reason. You disconnected it and are going to complain about the main battery that powers the entire system and shouldn't it? Of course, every service will refuse you. And I think they will write it to your VIN and it will be visible there in all the services you decide to visit. You do all the modifications at your own risk. That's why, for example, if a dealer does a remote start for you, they will add the information to the configuration of your car in their systems that it also has a remote start.
Are you asking if anyone has ever encountered such treatment? The answer is YES, absolutely everyone who does what you do. If you were reasonable enough, you would connect the battery before visiting the service.

 

[R3TRO]

So, back on track, I'm interested in hearing if someone has been, or knows someone who has been denied service based on this modification, which I personally consider as benign (provided you don't run ESS events with one battery) as "disabling the vanity mirror light."

I've had my main and aux battery replaced after 2yrs under warranty. 2yrs later started acting up again so I did the H7 upgrade and fuse pull myself.

Earlier this year my transmission started acting up and needed some internal clutches replaced under warranty. The dealer commented on noticing that I pulled the aux battery and put in a larger main. He basically said he would have done the same based on how many Jeeps he sees a week in here because of battery issues. Didn't seem concerned or give me a warning about future repairs concerning warranty work. Not saying all dealers won't give a sh!t, but mine didn't.

 

[resotek]

Well... My bone stock 2020 would no longer remote start, so I pulled the fuse and taped off the AUX lead (which is totally and easily reversible if desired). My main was clearly on it's last leg, but I wanted to stretch it as long as I could. A few months later it failed to crank and I jumped it with my little NOCO GBX45 without issue and replaced the dead battery with an H7. It's been smooth sailing ever since.

Per my experience I would never go back to dual batteries. My biggest issue were the reports that you could NOT jump start the darn thing with the OEM dual setup! That was a deal breaker for me and now I know that's no longer an issue.

 

[AndySpill]

If you interfere with the electrical system and specifically want to complain about it, it's built on its head.

I respectfully don't know what you mean by the change being built on its head so I can't address it.

The manufacturer gave some kind of battery for some reason.

I addressed that. It was for entertainment system voltage sensitive issues when running ESS events. And perhaps it was for preserving cranking power in the main battery after an ESS event, running appliances during that event off only the Aux battery, which is why I would agree with you if I didn't also tell people with one main battery to not run ESS events.

You disconnected it and are going to complain about the main battery that powers the entire system and shouldn't it?

Yes. Here's why. That main battery, in its smaller H6 size, let alone its larger H7 offering (standard with the beefier alternator) is not alone, powering the entire system. It's being backed up, (in either size factory alternator) by a smart alternator that will provide the current to the battery needed to backfill electrical current demanded of the factory appliances. The notion that the Aux battery is needed during non ESS events has been thoroughly battle tested to not be the case. And again, nobody at Stellantis put this motorcycle battery in the JL for overlanding engine off power. If you want that you buy a Genesis kit: another electrical modification mind you that I haven't heard of a single customer being denied service over. Heck, it's a better mousetrap that Stellantis put into their JLs, it's just overkill for most street dwellers like me.

Of course, every service will refuse you.

@Cartman, if you weren't literally in Slovakia I might ask, "are you in Slovakia?!" In so doing my thought would be to in no way be disparaging against your country, but more intend to ask if "you're living on the surface of the moon or something. "

I expect denying service for this modification to be non-existent. Thousands of owners have done it. I haven't heard a single report of problems at a dealer for it, which is what inspired my initial post, to see if in reality some had been denied service due to this modification.

And I think they will write it to your VIN and it will be visible there in all the services you decide to visit.

And your entitled to your thoughts. Here's what I don't think, but know. The vast majority of techs not working on either battery replacement or a customer report of a failed Power Control Relay (PCR): the very devise that pulling Fuse 42 as part of this modification will prevent from energizing (and nobody pulling that Fuse is going to report defective) are even going to notice this change. And the remainder of techs that do will not give a rat's ass.

You do all the modifications at your own risk. That's why, for example, if a dealer does a remote start for you, they will add the information to the configuration of your car in their systems that it also has a remote start.

There's homemade changing the vehicle's propulsion system from gasoline to hydrogen gas and there's, like I said, disabling the vanity mirror lights because it, say, interferes with night vision (it's a hypothetical). The kind of changes you describe effect the configuration of vehicle computers that need, after a necessary vehicle service flashing of same to be reset back to that configuration to provide that service, hence the "vehicle sales code."

Are you asking if anyone has ever encountered such treatment? The answer is YES, absolutely everyone who does what you do. If you were reasonable enough, you would connect the battery before visiting the service.

I would think if this were the case, given such techniques were first introduced in 2018 on this forum https://www.jlwranglerforums.com/forum/threads/3-6l-ess-aux-battery-bypass.17293/, that people would have voiced such service denial claims if they were the case. Sure, if a customer comes in with this change and needs a new battery the dealer, particularly as a warranty claim, may only be willing to install the factory configured dual battery setup. But to turn down a customer, particularly out of warranty, and the money for repairing "an alignment issue" because they run one battery on a dual AGM battery JL, I think that rare and nuts.

I admit to lacking the data to back that up, hence my first post. But "my data" lies in the lack of complaints I've read here about such service denial. That said, do source posts here as to this uniform denial of service for this battery modification you speak of.

All this said, might it be a good idea to charge the ESS battery and rehook up the cables, prior to a service visit, particularly under warranty, provided that ESS battery can even hold a charge, just to avoid problems: sure.

Let me leave you with this paradox @Cartman. An owner can't crank their dual AGM JL. They disconnect the batteries, yank Fuse 42, and separately change both batteries (something I recommend.) They lthen oad test each battery and as has so frequently happened here, the ESS battery won't hold a charge. To reconnect the batteries would potentially cannibalize the working main one: the likely reason they couldn't crank initially.

So they come into the dealer with the batteries separated and are denied service to replace both batteries because they did the very thing they needed to get going again to get to the dealer for service?

Really?

 

[The Last Cowboy]

I would expect that they wouldn’t warrant anything with the charging system or PDC/fuse box. Anything else shouldn’t be affected. But, with CDJR dealers, anything is possible.

 

[AndySpill]

Well... My bone stock 2020 would no longer remote start, so I pulled the fuse and taped off the AUX lead (which is totally and easily reversible if desired). My main was clearly on it's last leg, but I wanted to stretch it as long as I could. A few months later it failed to crank and I jumped it with my little NOCO GBX45 without issue and replaced the dead battery with an H7. It's been smooth sailing ever since.

Per my experience I would never go back to dual batteries. My biggest issue were the reports that you could NOT jump start the darn thing with the OEM dual setup! That was a deal breaker for me and now I know that's no longer an issue.

...but were you denied service from a dealer on a non battery related issues, warrantied or not, because of this...?

 

[resotek]

...but were you denied service from a dealer on a non battery related issues, warrantied or not, because of this...?

No, not at all. The point was that it's reversible in 5 minutes if you're worried about such things.

 

[THAW]

Wow, for a bunch of reasons this wasn't the response I expected. Soap box ascending time.

First, the question was if someone had been denied service. But ok, posts do where posts go, and sometimes, myself included, people add tangents to the central thread question, so let's address them.

But before I do, conflict of interest statement: I have no horse in this race. I run two AGM batteries, like originally factory provided (having swapped them due to age) trickle charge, and engage ESS. But that's just me. YMMV and that's cool with me. You do you and I'll do me here.

@mwilk012, @Cartman : you make it sound like by bypassing the Aux battery, a mere cable and fuse pull, is like someone modified their JL to the extent that they've changed the propulsion system from "gasoline to hydrogen gas." Sure, dealers have every right to turn away servicing vehicles that significantly differ from stock, particularly when the repair in question touches upon the very owner modifications, having no official road map upon which to effect dealer consistent and Stellantis blessed approaches to service.

But it is precisely these genuine excuses that have been so abused by the guarantors of warranties (dealers/manufacturers) that inspired the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act (MMWA) of 1975, which, as it relates to vehicles at least, places the onus of demonstrating that the aftermarket part or modification directly caused the defect or failure for which warranty coverage is being sought. Of course enforcing that requires lawyers and money (on the part of the vehicle owner.) And sometimes, sure, the repair is not warranty related.

So @Cartman, that's actually not the law, much that practically speaking, given the cost of litigation, your statement has practical application.

And @mwilk012 , I appreciate, from the mechanic's perspective your frustration in the ignorant owner making poor or bad modifications to vehicles that make your life servicing them more difficult. But again, this isn't adding "drone wings and making the vehicle airborne, crashing, smashing up the radiator and asking you to replace it." This is an extremely mild modification, with absolutely no downstream implications, battle tested over years, and something that wouldn't be necessary if Stellantis had gotten ESS right in the first place.

You write, "If you’re the type of person to suggest that 10,000 random idiots online also do this to your jeep, God help you."

Let me clarify. I don't recommend 10,000 random idiots effect this change, I recommend that every dual AGM battery JL owner, who doesn't want to run ESS events, learn, if they can (it's not hard) to do this change or turf it out to someone who can. And this is coming from a forum member who is probably pretty far "green leaning." I'm all about limiting hydrocarbons, but not at owner expense of a crappy ESS system design.

My only trepidation is the B.S. a dealer might offer in denying service for this change that was the very impetus for this thread.

And allow me to go out on a limb and say that bypassing the Aux battery doesn't merely fail to cause a defect or failure, it outright address and corrects one. That failure was the installation of a second, dissimilar size (albeit same battery chemistry as is necessary in) parallel connected battery to regulate the voltage sensitive entertainment system during ESS events. Best practices find, unlike here, identical size and type batteries connected in parallel, and ideally, in Stellantis' case, the periodic and automatic assignment of one of those batteries as the Aux, and one as the main, switching off for even wear, that would have been prudent IMHO. Everything about this Aux battery, including its ridiculous location for service, particularly in light of the frequency with which in needs service, strikes me as engineering afterthought.

Funny, other manufacturers managed to do just fine with one battery ESS systems. From my vantage point Stellantis' solution to this entertain system problem was to put the screws to its entertainment system vendor to engineer a less voltage sensitive system as clearly must be found in other ICE vehicles running ESS on one battery, not incorporate a flawed dissimilar sized double battery solution to address it. That's solving one problem by creating another. The only thing I can say in fairness to Stellantis is that the Jeep is unique (compared to some sedan let's say running ESS ) in owner frequency of adding electrical current hungry appliances for which two batteries makes sense. But the very aftermarket addition of such power hungry things, from winches to sound systems seems best addressed by also incorporating aftermarket battery systems like Genesis offers, or some factory upgrade of same, not make every dual AGM battery JL owner have these two batteries.

So, back on track, I'm interested in hearing if someone has been, or knows someone who has been denied service based on this modification, which I personally consider as benign (provided you don't run ESS events with one battery) as "disabling the vanity mirror light."

Off soap box.

Word count: 842

I respectfully don't know what you mean by the change being built on its head so I can't address it.


I addressed that. It was for entertainment system voltage sensitive issues when running ESS events. And perhaps it was for preserving cranking power in the main battery after an ESS event, running appliances during that event off only the Aux battery, which is why I would agree with you if I didn't also tell people with one main battery to not run ESS events.


Yes. Here's why. That main battery, in its smaller H6 size, let alone its larger H7 offering (standard with the beefier alternator) is not alone, powering the entire system. It's being backed up, (in either size factory alternator) by a smart alternator that will provide the current to the battery needed to backfill electrical current demanded of the factory appliances. The notion that the Aux battery is needed during non ESS events has been thoroughly battle tested to not be the case. And again, nobody at Stellantis put this motorcycle battery in the JL for overlanding engine off power. If you want that you buy a Genesis kit: another electrical modification mind you that I haven't heard of a single customer being denied service over. Heck, it's a better mousetrap that Stellantis put into their JLs, it's just overkill for most street dwellers like me.



@Cartman, if you weren't literally in Slovakia I might ask, "are you in Slovakia?!" In so doing my thought would be to in no way be disparaging against your country, but more intend to ask if "you're living on the surface of the moon or something. "

I expect denying service for this modification to be non-existent. Thousands of owners have done it. I haven't heard a single report of problems at a dealer for it, which is what inspired my initial post, to see if in reality some had been denied service due to this modification.


And your entitled to your thoughts. Here's what I don't think, but know. The vast majority of techs not working on either battery replacement or a customer report of a failed Power Control Relay (PCR): the very devise that pulling Fuse 42 as part of this modification will prevent from energizing (and nobody pulling that Fuse is going to report defective) are even going to notice this change. And the remainder of techs that do will not give a rat's ass.


There's homemade changing the vehicle's propulsion system from gasoline to hydrogen gas and there's, like I said, disabling the vanity mirror lights because it, say, interferes with night vision (it's a hypothetical). The kind of changes you describe effect the configuration of vehicle computers that need, after a necessary vehicle service flashing of same to be reset back to that configuration to provide that service, hence the "vehicle sales code."



I would think if this were the case, given such techniques were first introduced in 2018 on this forum https://www.jlwranglerforums.com/forum/threads/3-6l-ess-aux-battery-bypass.17293/, that people would have voiced such service denial claims if they were the case. Sure, if a customer comes in with this change and needs a new battery the dealer, particularly as a warranty claim, may only be willing to install the factory configured dual battery setup. But to turn down a customer, particularly out of warranty, and the money for repairing "an alignment issue" because they run one battery on a dual AGM battery JL, I think that rare and nuts.

I admit to lacking the data to back that up, hence my first post. But "my data" lies in the lack of complaints I've read here about such service denial. That said, do source posts here as to this uniform denial of service for this battery modification you speak of.

All this said, might it be a good idea to charge the ESS battery and rehook up the cables, prior to a service visit, particularly under warranty, provided that ESS battery can even hold a charge, just to avoid problems: sure.

Let me leave you with this paradox @Cartman. An owner can't crank their dual AGM JL. They disconnect the batteries, yank Fuse 42, and separately change both batteries (something I recommend.) They lthen oad test each battery and as has so frequently happened here, the ESS battery won't hold a charge. To reconnect the batteries would potentially cannibalize the working main one: the likely reason they couldn't crank initially.

So they come into the dealer with the batteries separated and are denied service to replace both batteries because they did the very thing they needed to get going again to get to the dealer for service?

Really?

Word count: 777

 

[AndySpill]

Word count: 842

Word count: 777

You poor thing @THAW, you were forced to read.

Lets contrast this with some of your posts that make no sense, like these brain farts of sorts, want examples?

Not that you read it of course, but what part did you find irrelevant, wrong?

It's not about the size champ. It's about whether what was said veered off course. It didn't.

Throw up a smiley face dude, it's all you got here.

 

[THAW]

You poor thing @THAW, you were forced to read.

Lets contrast this with some of your posts that make no sense, like these brain farts of sorts, want examples?

Not that you read it of course, but what part did you find irrelevant, wrong?

I found you wrote absolutely nothing you haven't written previously a dozen times.

 

[AndySpill]

I found you wrote absolutely nothing you haven't written previously a dozen times.

News flash @THAW. Maybe other people haven't, whether I've repeated content or not, read what you have. Every think about that? Clearly those I was responded to hadn't, or they wouldn't have said what they did prior. But hey, the board's all about you Foster, right?

You ever hear the expression, "if you had an original idea it would die of loneliness?" I'm curious how many times here you simply critique dothers verses starting your own thought chain on a thread as an OP. Sure, plenty of OPs post junk. And then forum members like you wait in the bushes to ambush posting few original ideas of their own.

If you can't contradict the message attack the messenger, right dude?

Sponsored