Why do you keep saying that? There's no assuming here, it has been clearly communicated that there are improvements, they just won't say exactly what they did. I can understand why FCA wants to keep the actual fix close to the vest. For example, I've been reading a lot on the Chevy Colorado with their EPS flat tow issues. Do you really expect FCA to just give away their intellectual property?
An "announcement" has been made. Stop saying otherwise, please. It's pretty frustrating to those of us who have
read the material and understand what it says.
For those of you who want a deeper insight into the the 2019 flat tow issue, this thread might be helpful:
https://jeepcherokeeclub.com/337-towing-towed/235106-2019-active-drive-ii-flat-tow.html
I stand corrected as to the publication. This is the first I've seen of it; you posted a reference to the "STAR Online Publication Case Number S1823000031" on July 21. When I googled that term I got nothing, so I didn't see what it said.
I know you do not like my skepticism, and as I have said before I hope that you're right. You know there has been misleading information in the past. Back during the 2014-'15 days when there were many conjecturing as to the cause of the KL wobble, someone posted a patent application for 'wobble mitigation' (by FCA, dated around 2011).
Of course if the "19 KL in OEM equipment form, has improvements that does not require the Mopar accessory Flat Tow Performance Kit to stabilize the vehicle" there are two possibilities here:
1- The aforementioned patent applies to this and intellectual property of FCA/Jeep is not at issue. They would not be "giving away" anything to Chevvy or Ford here.
2- FCA/Jeep did something entirely different from what that patent specifies. Under this possibility, I would expect that there is another patent.
3- Or, do you think they are keeping this as a trade secret?
Furthermore I think it's a soimewhat insulting to imply that I should "read the material and understand what it says". Have you read the patent? Have you seen evidence FCA tested their new design?
I am not trying to start an argument here but you seem to be argumentative regarding anything which questions the "improvements".