Comprehensive guide to common Dodge Charger defects, recalls, TSBs, and how to protect your rights under state lemon laws.
Model years covered: 2011-2022
The Dodge Charger has been an American staple in the full‑size performance sedan market for over a decade, praised for its V8 powertrains and aggressive styling. But like any high‑volume platform, certain model years and powertrain/configurations have developed repeatable problems that frustrate owners — notably transmission harshness in automatic models, electronic/infotainment faults, and several safety‑related recalls. These issues are especially relevant for buyers of used Chargers and owners still under factory warranty.
This guide consolidates documented defects, NHTSA complaint trends, major recalls, Technical Service Bulletins (TSBs), and litigation history so Charger owners can recognize when a vehicle may qualify as a “lemon.” It also summarizes likely legal outcomes and state‑specific tips (California, Texas, Florida) to help you decide when to escalate a persistent problem to a dealer, manufacturer, or attorney. If your Charger exhibits repeated failures that impair its use, value, or safety, knowing the technical details and repair history will make a lemon claim far stronger.
Total recalls: 12
Dodge Charger recalls over the last decade have covered several high‑profile safety issues and a number of equipment faults. The most critical recall campaigns involved replacement of Takata airbag inflators, software/security updates and module reprograms for Uconnect vulnerabilities, and steering or suspension component recalls that could affect vehicle control. FCA/ Stellantis also issued recalls addressing wiring harness chafing, fuel system concerns on specific engines, and shift‑lever or transmission-controlled‑gear selector issues that could increase the risk of rollaway if not corrected.
Owners should regularly check the vehicle identification number (VIN) against the NHTSA recall database and schedule remedy work with an authorized Dodge/Chrysler dealer. While many recalls are safety‑critical and performed at no charge, obtaining documentation of completed recall work is vital evidence in any lemon law or warranty dispute.
View all Dodge recalls and NHTSA safety alerts
Technicians commonly rely on Technical Service Bulletins (TSBs) rather than recalls to address Charger complaints. Frequent TSBs for the model line include transmission reprograms and updated shift calibrations, torque converter replacement procedures, BCM/PCM software flashes to cure parasitic drains or no‑start complaints, and HVAC blower motor and climate control module fixes for weak airflow or blower noise. Many transmission complaints are first addressed with a TSB reflash; persistent hardware failures may still require component replacement under warranty.
TSBs do not obligate the owner to free repairs (they direct dealers on repair procedures), but they often form the backbone of a pattern showing repeated unsuccessful attempts to repair the same defect — a key element in lemon law claims.
Charger owners have participated in multiple consumer complaints and coordinated legal actions focused primarily on transmission reliability and prolonged drivability problems. Beginning in the mid‑2010s, class actions and multi‑plaintiff suits alleged that automatic transmissions exhibited design or calibration defects causing rough shifting and premature failure; some cases were settled or resolved with extended warranties, dealer buyback options, or cash settlements depending on state law and the facts of each claim. Separately, the Uconnect remote‑access vulnerability prompted regulatory scrutiny and at least one consumer complaint group that pushed for broader software fixes and disclosure.
While some litigation resulted in structured settlements or remediation programs, outcomes vary widely by year, defect, jurisdiction, and whether owners pursued buybacks under state lemon laws or federal consumer protection statutes.
Repeated hesitation and shuddering — especially when tied to the transmission — can form the basis of a lemon claim if the dealer has been unable to fix it after a reasonable number of attempts (often 3–4) or the vehicle has been out of service for a long cumulative time. Keep all repair orders, diagnostic reports, and a log of when the issue occurs to build your case.
There’s no universal number: many states use a 3–4 attempt guideline or an aggregate days‑out‑of‑service standard. California treats serious safety defects more leniently. Check your state’s statute and consult a lemon law attorney — document every visit, the repairs performed, and any dealer correspondence.
It depends on state law and whether the CPO vehicle is still under the manufacturer’s bumper‑to‑bumper warranty. Many state lemon laws cover defects occurring during the express warranty period, even for CPO vehicles. Read your CPO warranty closely and consult an attorney if repairs are unsuccessful.
Potentially — if the security flaw causes actual loss of use, repeated loss of function, or safety concerns and the dealer cannot repair the problem after a reasonable number of attempts. Often a software patch or reprogram is issued; if that fails repeatedly, it strengthens a lemon claim.
Collect repair orders and invoices, the vehicle’s warranty information, recall notices, TSBs you’ve received, a written log of the problems with dates/times, photos or videos of symptoms, and any communications with the dealer or manufacturer. This paperwork establishes the repair history critical to a successful lemon claim.