2025 Ram 1500 Hurricane Engine Problems & California Lemon Law

2025 Ram 1500 Hurricane engine problems reported by owners include stalling, sudden loss of power, limp mode, misfires, and repeated warning lights. A federal class action alleges defects in engine and powertrain control modules, while FCA has issued separate recalls for instrument-cluster failures. California owners with serious or recurring warranty problems may qualify for a lemon law buyback or replacement. Even one dangerous stall is worth discussing with a lemon law attorney; it does not, by itself, establish a repurchase claim.

Has your 2025 Ram 1500 stalled, lost power, or displayed critical warnings? Request a free California lemon law case review or call (888) 536-6628. You do not have to wait for another breakdown or a class-action outcome to ask for an evaluation.

What Ram 1500 Hurricane engine problems are owners reporting?

The 2025 Ram 1500 introduced the 3.0-liter twin-turbo Hurricane inline-six in standard- and high-output versions. NHTSA has received hundreds of complaints about the 2025 Ram 1500 across its engine options and configurations. Owner reports describe several concerns, although complaints are allegations, not verified findings that every Hurricane engine has a defect:

• Stalling and loss of power while driving, sometimes accompanied by messages such as “Vehicle Will Shut Off Soon” or “Stop Safely.”
• Limp mode or reduced power, including at highway speed, sometimes with continuing check-engine lights or diagnostic trouble codes.
• Misfires and hesitation, with some owners reporting repeat visits or software updates.
• Blank or frozen instrument clusters, obscuring speed, gear position, or warning indicators.
• Battery drain and no-start conditions, including reports of repeat battery replacement.
• Unexpected automatic braking, other driver-assistance faults, and repair delays.

Electrical problems are prominent in NHTSA's vehicle complaint and recall records, but electrical, engine, and driver-assistance complaints should not be assumed to share one cause. The repair order should identify what the driver reported and what the dealer actually inspected or changed.

Ram 1500 instrument-cluster recalls: 26V-225 and 25V-826

On April 9, 2026, FCA reported NHTSA recall 26V-225 (Ram campaign 35D), covering 65,348 potentially affected 2025–2026 Ram trucks, including 18,897 Ram 1500 pickups. Software in certain 3.5-inch instrument clusters may cause the display to stop working, depriving drivers of critical safety information. The remedy is a dealer software update; owner notices were mailed in May 2026.

An earlier, separate NHTSA recall 25V-826 (Ram campaigns B4C/B8C) concerns blank instrument clusters in certain 2025–2026 Ram trucks, including trucks with affected 12-inch displays. Dealers inspect and update the software or replace the cluster as needed. These recalls concern dashboard displays; neither establishes a recall of the Hurricane engine for stalling. Check your truck's VIN through NHTSA's recall lookup.

If a cluster fails again after a recall repair, promptly report the recurrence and retain both repair orders. A documented recall visit and subsequent visit for the same unresolved problem can be relevant repair opportunities; a recall's existence alone does not establish a lemon law claim.

FCA's service bulletin addresses some Hurricane misfires

Separate from a recall, FCA's technical service bulletin 08-031-25 Rev. B addresses certain 2025 Ram 1500 trucks equipped with the standard-output 3.0-liter Hurricane. It identifies check-engine lights, specified misfire codes, and hesitation or misfires, and calls for checking and potentially reprogramming the ignition and powertrain control modules. This is a service bulletin, not an engine-stalling recall, and its applicability depends on the vehicle and symptoms.

The Hurricane engine class action: Norberg v. FCA US LLC

In August 2026, two owners filed a proposed class action in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan (Norberg et al. v. FCA US LLC, No. 2:26-cv-13040). The complaint alleges that 2025 Ram 1500 trucks with the 3.0-liter Hurricane engine have improperly calibrated, programmed, or integrated engine-control or powertrain-control modules. The alleged results include recurring fault codes, loss of power, loss of power brakes, stalling, misfires, and limp mode.

The complaint states that some owners reportedly made as many as eight unsuccessful repair visits. It also describes one owner's truck spending more than a month at a dealership for testing and brake-system work before a brake booster was replaced. Those are allegations in a pending lawsuit, not judicial findings; the named owners' experiences do not establish what happened to a different California truck.

For California owners, the class action and an individual lemon law claim serve different purposes. Depending on the facts, an individual Song-Beverly claim may provide a repurchase or replacement. The proposed class action does not require an owner to wait before seeking individual advice, although any future class certification, settlement, release, or opt-out deadline could affect legal options. The lawsuit also alleges FCA had prior notice of the problems; that allegation is not, without proof, a finding of knowledge or willful misconduct.

Repeated repairs without a lasting fix? Have your Ram repair history reviewed before signing a class settlement, manufacturer release, or trade-in agreement. Call (888) 536-6628.

How California's lemon law applies to a 2025 Ram 1500

Under the Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act (Civil Code § 1790 et seq.), when a covered vehicle cannot be brought into conformity with its express warranty after a reasonable number of repair opportunities, the manufacturer may owe a replacement or restitution, subject to applicable deductions and other requirements (Civil Code § 1793.2(d)). The analysis turns on the defect's seriousness, warranty coverage, repair history, and effect on the vehicle's use, value, or safety.

Repair attempts include more than part replacements. Under CACI 3202, presenting the truck to an authorized repair facility for repair can be a repair opportunity even if the dealer performs no work. A “could not duplicate” notation does not automatically erase the visit; see what to do when the repair record says no problem was found and Oregel v. American Isuzu Motors, Inc. (2001) 90 Cal.App.4th 1094.

The lemon law presumption is not a minimum requirement for contacting counsel. Within the first 18 months after delivery or 18,000 miles, whichever occurs first, Civil Code § 1793.22(b) establishes a rebuttable presumption of reasonable repair attempts in specified circumstances:

• Two or more attempts to fix the same condition likely to cause death or serious bodily injury, with direct manufacturer notice where legally required;
• Four or more attempts to fix the same nonconformity, with direct manufacturer notice where legally required; or
• More than 30 cumulative calendar days out of service for qualifying warranty repairs, subject to statutory extensions.

Direct notice under the first two alternatives is required for the presumption only when the manufacturer made the required disclosures in the warranty or owner's manual. A qualifying dispute-resolution procedure may also affect when the presumption can be invoked. A claim can still be evaluated without the presumption, including outside the 18-month/18,000-mile period. A single dangerous highway stall warrants prompt safety attention and may justify an early legal review, but does not automatically prove entitlement to a buyback.

Long repairs and software updates matter. Civil Code § 1793.2(b) generally requires warranty repairs to be completed within 30 days, subject to delays beyond the manufacturer's control. Save drop-off and pickup dates when calculating downtime. An ECM/PCM reflash performed to address a reported defect is relevant repair evidence; if software is installed over the air, preserve the notice, date, and any continuing symptoms.

FCA opted into California's new lemon law procedures

California's Department of Consumer Affairs lists FCA US LLC as opted in effective April 25, 2025. As a result, the applicable requirements in Code of Civil Procedure §§ 871.20–871.30 are important for Ram claims:

• Notice before seeking civil penalties. Under CCP § 871.24, written notice at least 30 days before a civil-penalty lawsuit must identify the consumer, VIN, problems and repair history, and demand repurchase or replacement. It must be sent by the prescribed email method or certified/registered mail, return receipt requested. FCA's DCA-listed notice email is warrantynotice@stellantis.com. This advance notice is not a prerequisite to asking a lawyer for a review; a restitution or replacement action can be filed without that notice if the statute's alternative requirements are met, but civil penalties cannot then be sought.
• FCA's response period. A compliant offer made within 30 days and completed within 60 days of receipt of qualifying notice can preclude civil penalties; other statutory conditions apply. The consumer must generally retain possession for 30 days after notice, or 60 days if FCA makes an offer.
• Time limits. CCP § 871.21 generally requires a covered action within one year after expiration of the applicable express warranty, and no later than six years after original delivery, subject to tolling provisions. Do not assume the full six years is available.

Legal review can help preserve evidence, evaluate coverage and deadlines, and coordinate required manufacturer notice. It does not replace immediate safety steps or legally required procedures.

What a California Ram 1500 buyback can include

An eligible lemon law repurchase can include qualifying payments, taxes, registration and license fees, loan payoff, and allowable incidental damages such as towing or rental expenses. Under CCP § 871.27, dealer-supplied accessories and certain dealer-supplied protection products may be recoverable, while qualifying third-party products and negative equity may be excluded or offset.

FCA may deduct a statutory mileage offset, generally calculated using mileage before the first qualifying repair attempt. For illustration, a $68,000 truck with 4,000 miles at that attempt yields a $2,267 use deduction ($68,000 × 4,000 ÷ 120,000). Where legally established, a willful violation can support a civil penalty of up to twice actual damages under Civil Code § 1794(c); a prevailing consumer may recover reasonable attorney's fees and costs under § 1794(d). Neither relief nor a particular outcome is guaranteed.

What to do if your Ram stalls or repeatedly loses power

1. Prioritize safety. If the truck stalls, loses braking assistance, or cannot be driven safely, move to a safe location if possible, arrange a tow, and seek prompt inspection. Do not continue driving an unsafe vehicle.
2. Keep every repair order. Include “no problem found” visits, technician notes, diagnostic codes, recall work, module reflashes, and repeat symptoms.
3. Record mileage and downtime. Save the mileage at the first repair complaint, plus both drop-off and pickup dates.
4. Save contemporaneous evidence. Photograph warnings safely when stopped; retain dates, service communications, and software-update notices.
5. Check recalls and make required reports or notices. Use the NHTSA VIN lookup, arrange applicable recall repairs, and document direct notice to FCA when relevant.
6. Seek a case review early. You do not need to wait for a second stall, a recall letter, another repair visit, or the class action. Obtain legal advice before accepting a release, trade-in settlement, or other resolution that could affect your rights.

Frequently asked questions

Is there a recall for the 2025 Ram 1500 Hurricane engine?

The verified recalls discussed here, 26V-225 and 25V-826, concern instrument-cluster software, not a recall of the Hurricane engine for stalling. A separate rear-camera software recall, 26V-560, also affects certain 2025–2026 Ram 1500s. Check your VIN for all applicable recalls. The Hurricane ECM/PCM stalling allegations are being litigated separately.

What if the dealer cannot reproduce my Ram's stalling problem?

A documented visit for the reported problem can still be a repair opportunity even when no fix is made. Ask the dealer to record the exact symptom, driving conditions, and your request for diagnosis. You can request a case review while the cause is still being investigated.

Should I wait for the Ram Hurricane class action?

No. California warranty claims can be evaluated independently. Before joining, opting out of, or signing a release in any class settlement, obtain advice about how it may affect individual rights.

Does my Ram need two or four repairs before I can call a lemon law attorney?

No. Those numbers describe certain statutory presumption rules, not a waiting period for advice. Even one serious stalling event may warrant a review, although further evidence or repair opportunities may be needed to establish a particular remedy.

Does the manufacturer have to pay my legal fees?

California law provides for recovery of reasonable attorney's fees and costs by a prevailing consumer in a qualifying Song-Beverly action. Fee arrangements and potential costs should be discussed during the case review; recovery is not automatic.

Request a California Ram 1500 lemon law case review

If your 2025 Ram 1500 Hurricane has stalled, entered limp mode, misfired, or suffered repeated electrical problems, request a free case review or call (888) 536-6628. Bring your repair orders, dates, mileage, and warning-message records. An early evaluation can identify what additional proof, notice, or repair steps may be needed without requiring you to delay safety repairs.

This article provides general information, not legal advice. Recall coverage depends on the vehicle's VIN. Owner complaints and the pending class-action allegations do not establish that any particular truck is defective.