backtop


Print 37 comment(s) - last by mavricxx.. on Apr 1 at 6:08 PM

Diesel power is on the table for other Jeep vehicles

Back in February of 2013, Chrysler announced that it would be putting a V-6 turbodiesel under the hood of its Ram 1500 pickup truck this year. Diesel engines have been part of the heavy-duty line of Ram pickup trucks for many years, but light-duty line is finally getting some love.

Chrysler is now spreading the V6 diesel to some of its other brands, including Jeep. Word has surfaced that a diesel-powered Jeep Grand Cherokee will land in showrooms next month. Chrysler is forecasting that anywhere from 10 to 15% of Grand Cherokee SUVs sold will be diesel-powered.

"We may well have under called it," said Jeep brand Chief Mike Manley. "We know that some of the German import brands have done a good job in terms of making diesel mainstream again."


Manley also admitted that Jeep is considering adding diesel-power to some of its other vehicles, including the incredibly popular Wrangler.

"In Wrangler, the question (of diesel) is more compelling because it helps with some of the capability attributes of that vehicle. Probably not in this generation Wrangler, probably next generation Wrangler," he said. "In the other vehicles, I think it's going to be a matter of just seeing how much demand is there. I think it will be there but there's nothing like the market to confirm that."

However, Manley did say that before any decisions are made on other diesel-powered Jeep vehicles, the company wants to see how well the Grand Cherokee diesel is received by the public.

Source: Detroit News



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Another peice of trash...
By KingofL337 on 3/28/2013 9:59:57 AM , Rating: 1
I had a Liberty CRD and it was junk.
The drive train was from the gas version and couldn't hold up to the torque from the diesel. Before I sold it had the torque converter replaced three times, then they de-tuned the engine to make less torque. Also, the rear end clunked and one of the motor mounts was bad. This was with only 38k. Plus the from ball joints were bad at 15k. Not to mention the seats stained from water, the windows kept sticking, and the rear brakes were shot with only 25k.




RE: Another peice of trash...
By mrwassman on 3/28/2013 10:04:20 AM , Rating: 2
Chrysler products are generally this way although the inline-6 jeeps seem to hold their own. Maybe this diesel V6 won't suck. (maybe)


RE: Another peice of trash...
By KingofL337 on 3/28/2013 10:11:54 AM , Rating: 4
The 4.0HO/4.2 drive line was from AMC that's why they were awesome.


RE: Another peice of trash...
By Joz on 3/28/2013 1:15:50 PM , Rating: 1
The 93' Grand Cherokee with the i6 still had shit Chrysler transmission....

But damn, that AMS inline-6 lasted forever, and ever. Still going strong; even with sand, concrete, dirt, twigs and all sorts of funk randomly getting into the oil, belts, bearings and other strange places.

Also, the cloth bucket seats were just amazing, compared to most other cars I've ever been in - including bmws, jags, vettes (awful), buicks, hondas, nissans, etc...

I miss my Jeep...had to finally get rid of it due to just plain ol' rust.


RE: Another peice of trash...
By Flunk on 3/28/2013 10:14:52 AM , Rating: 2
Transmission and brake problems are pretty common on Jeep products.

However, all those problems in 38k is a real lemon. I hope you sold it before the end of the warranty.


RE: Another peice of trash...
By FITCamaro on 3/28/2013 11:11:53 AM , Rating: 3
I'm just glad to see some movement towards more consumer level diesels rather than having to buy a heavy duty version of a truck to get one in a larger platform than a Jetta/335.


RE: Another peice of trash...
By Reclaimer77 on 3/28/13, Rating: 0
RE: Another peice of trash...
By Manch on 3/28/2013 12:41:58 PM , Rating: 1
I'd hardly call Chrysler American anymore. Other than the wrangler and Ram series, do they even have a platform that's not ripped from elsewhere? The 300/charger/challenger is a warmed over merc e-class chasis from a decade ago. There new Cherokee is the same platform as the dart which they got from Fiat. The only thing Chrysler does is reskinn them, add a crap drive train and shoddy interior.
The Wrangler has always been an exception to the to the rule w/Chryslers.
Even the Ram hasn't seen a decent chasis update in a while.

Ford and Chevy do a much better job on their vehicles. Hell, Chevy still isn't paying taxes so that probably helps.


RE: Another peice of trash...
By Argon18 on 3/28/2013 12:48:44 PM , Rating: 5
Not only is Chevy not paying taxes, but they were also allowed to write off $Billions in tax-payer bailout dollars as part of their restructuring. When GM claims they "paid back" their gov't loans, it's an outright lie. What they mean, is they've paid back the loans they received after the restructuring. The $Billions they received before, was all written off as a loss. Of course the GM executives all walked away with 10's of Millions in bonuses.

When you buy GM, you're paying twice for your vehicle. Once at the dealer, and again in your income taxes. Don't fund piss poor senior management and corrupt Union thugs. Don't buy GM products!


RE: Another peice of trash...
By Manch on 3/29/2013 4:10:51 AM , Rating: 1
I don't buy GM, only Fords or Subarus. While but some of their vehicles are still decent, and some even lust worthy, I refuse to buy GM because of all of that.


RE: Another peice of trash...
By marvdmartian on 3/28/2013 2:44:57 PM , Rating: 2
Let's just hope that the next generation Wrangler, that they allude to in this article, doesn't end up being the atrocious POS that their new "Cherokee" is looking to be! Someone at Chrysler should hang their head in shame for that thing!!


RE: Another peice of trash...
By Manch on 3/29/2013 4:07:00 AM , Rating: 2
The way they're going, it'll probably be a unibody also...

I think I hit a few nerves with the Dodge fans lol!


RE: Another peice of trash...
By Mr Perfect on 3/29/2013 12:20:56 PM , Rating: 2
Wait, the new Cherokee is unibody?


RE: Another peice of trash...
By JediJeb on 3/29/2013 8:08:43 PM , Rating: 2
Ummm the old cherokee xj from 84-01 is unibody also. But this new one is horrendous. Even in their marketing they boast about better on-road performance. People bought the XJs more for off-road performance than on-road. What was Chrysler thinking.


RE: Another peice of trash...
By Manch on 3/31/2013 6:10:49 AM , Rating: 2
I know they were unibody, but the XJ's were pretty stout, and it didn't take too much reinforcement for some serious off roading. Even still they were a compromise compared to the older Cherokees. The Wrangler on the other hand has stayed body on frame. I'm worried Chrysler will turn it into a unibody. That would destroy the wrangler.

They're ruining every other car they have. Ram with Air suspension? da fuq?


RE: Another peice of trash...
By Reflex on 3/28/2013 12:38:55 PM , Rating: 2
I have a 2006 Liberty CRD and its been fantastic. I am at 115k miles and I have had a grand total of $500 in repairs that were not wear related items.

Also you are incorrect about the powertrain, it uses the transmission from the RAM 1500 and most of the connective parts. There was a recall on the 2005 model about the torque converter that fixed that, my guess is that you never got that recall done and were going to third party shops who were not aware of it.

Great vehicle, and the GC diesel is my likely upgrade.

Oh, and my fuel economy has been awesome.


RE: Another peice of trash...
By KingofL337 on 3/28/2013 2:21:52 PM , Rating: 3
Nope, I went to the local dealer, I wasn't the only one. The CRD form on jeepforms constantly had people complaining about these cars and loosing the torque converter.

You probably had a detuned version from the start, also have you ever used it to tow even something small? I was only pulling a two place snowmobile trailer but still it shouldn't have had so many issues. It doesn't matter if the tranny was from the 1500 or the Liberty they were designed for the underpowered 3.7v6. Either way, the torque converter, tranny, and rear end should have been specially built for a diesel. Diesels make torque down low and can cause the converter, and bands in the tranny to slip under low rpm conditions due to insufficient hydraulic pressure.

Honestly, if it was only the torque converter, I would have installed a custom built unit. But it wasn't.


RE: Another peice of trash...
By Lord 666 on 3/28/2013 2:57:52 PM , Rating: 2
Why didn't you get a 08 - 10 Cherokee CRD then as most of the drive train were MB.

Looking forward to seeing this and the other diesels at the NYC auto show this weekend. Now only if some manufacturer made a reliable diesel minivan.


RE: Another peice of trash...
By Reflex on 3/28/2013 3:30:54 PM , Rating: 2
Clearly you had a lemon. That happens. I towed a loaded trailer back and forth through the Rockies repeatedly, and it handled it just fine. A rancher friend of mine wanted to buy it off me after they used it to tow some stuff and were surprised at how well it performed.

Sorry you had such a bad experience, but its a great little vehicle.


RE: Another peice of trash...
By jeffkro on 3/28/2013 1:06:41 PM , Rating: 2
Just for comparison with your jeep I have driven my Tacoma for 7 years without A single problem


RE: Another peice of trash...
By piroroadkill on 3/31/2013 11:31:29 AM , Rating: 2
So the fact it was Diesel was not the problem, the fact the car was engineered like crap was the problem, and everything else fell apart around the engine.

Fair enough.


Eh
By lagomorpha on 3/28/2013 10:29:14 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Back in February of 2013, Chrysler announced that it would be putting a V-6 turbodiesel under the hood of its Ram 1500 pickup truck this year


Still disappointed they didn't go with the Cummins 4.0




RE: Eh
By GotThumbs on 3/28/2013 11:21:45 AM , Rating: 2
Agreed. The inline engines tend to be bullet proof IMO.

The new V6 diesel is from a proven company (Italian firm VM Motori) and NOT manufactured by Dodge.

When I was looking for a light duty diesel powered pickup, I was restricted to the larger HD trucks because of my Diesel requirement. While I now own a Dodge Ram 3500 truck, I don't regret going for the Cummings engine. That WAS the deciding factor between going with Ford or Dodge. The interior is not what I would consider a quality finish (dash is cracked in multiple places), but the engine/transmission was the key decision factor.

I regularly average ~25 mpg each tank. I do have mostly HWY driving. On a recent 2,200 mile trip, I averaged 23 mpg for the whole trip which involved 35% city driving.

Diesel IS a great option and worth the added initial cost of purchase IMO.


RE: Eh
By Argon18 on 3/28/2013 12:40:31 PM , Rating: 2
It's funny, none of the big-3 make their own diesel engines. They all buy from someone else.

Chrysler buys them from Cummins and VM Motori.
Ford buys them from International (Navistar) and Cummins.
GM buys theirs from Isuzu (Dmax).

I don't rightly understand why. I guess they don't sell enough to warrant the R&D costs of making their own? I dunno. I do like that VW/Audi, BMW, and Mercedes all design and build their own diesel engines. Of course in Europe, diesels are the majority of the market share, 60% or so.


RE: Eh
By lagomorpha on 3/28/2013 1:57:25 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
It's funny, none of the big-3 make their own diesel engines. They all buy from someone else.


GM tried making their own 5.7 diesel back in the 70s and it was one of the worst engines of all time. It was so bad that its memory is a large part of the reason a lot of Americans to this day will not even consider buying a diesel vehicle.


RE: Eh
By Argon18 on 3/28/2013 4:36:53 PM , Rating: 2
That engine was indeed a turd, primarily because GM cut corners by using a gasoline engine block to build a diesel. You can't do that, as a diesel engine operates at much higher pressures; you need an engine block that is designed from the beginning to be a diesel. GM learned this the hard way.

VW, on the other hand, also decided to offer diesel engines in the 1970's, but they did exactly the opposite - they designed a block for a diesel, and to save costs, they used the same block for their gasoline engines. Had GM gone this route, they never would have had the problems they did.

As for Americans not buying diesels because of the GM 5.7 from the 70's, that argument is getting almost geriatric. Most who was old enough to buy a brand new car in the 70's are senior citizens today. Not many people younger than 60 remember that GM disaster engine. Americans don't buy diesels today, because we don't have much choice in the matter.

VW and Mercedes are the only options for several decades now. Only recently has BMW and Jeep jumped into the American Diesel market. If you could buy a Ford Explorer, F-150, Toyota Camry and Accord, etc. with a diesel, it would catch on very quickly. It's a niche market right now. Not to mention that diesel isn't advertised here. Of the VW and Mercedes TV commercials, how many of them have made mention of their diesels? Few or none. Americans don't buy diesels, because Americans don't know about them. They market and advertise the crap out of anything with a "Hybrid" badge on it, so that's what people buy.


RE: Eh
By jeffkro on 3/28/2013 5:15:43 PM , Rating: 2
GM's 6.2 also had problems but hey 1980's GM


RE: Eh
By RU482 on 3/28/2013 5:24:26 PM , Rating: 2
Can we retire the "people won't buy diesels because of the 70's 5.7L Olds Diesel conundrum"? What percentage of buyers were even alive then, much less not aware that it was an isolated (to GM) deal. let it go man


RE: Eh
By Nfarce on 3/28/2013 7:41:16 PM , Rating: 2
My dad bought a 1979 Oldsmobile Cutlass Supreme sedan with a diesel. It was the WORST decision of this life. We broke down many times on the highway because of that POS. But he didn't give up on diesel ownership. He later bought a 1983 GMC conversion van with a diesel 6.2 liter. It lasted for 14 years and 300k miles with just two transmission replacements. Nothing else major done, not even electronic wise.

But that 70s GM diesel was crap because it wasn't designed from the ground up as a diesel. It was a gas engine design they converted to a diesel. And as anyone who knows diesels knows, the are very different from the bottom end up. Hope those GM idiots back in the 70s were fired.


RE: Eh
By lagomorpha on 3/29/2013 6:42:11 AM , Rating: 2
It actually is a myth that GM just tried to convert their gasoline smallblock into a diesel. The block in the 5.7 diesel was designed to be a diesel but GM still had absolutely no clue what they were doing.


RE: Eh
By Spuke on 3/28/2013 5:28:23 PM , Rating: 2
Ford's new 6.7L diesel is their own. No more Navistars.


RE: Eh
By JediJeb on 3/29/2013 8:15:02 PM , Rating: 2
Also remember that Ford owns Cummins so I guess that could be considered a Ford product now also.


RE: Eh
By Mr Perfect on 3/29/2013 12:17:28 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah, when did they stop using the Cummins engines? They used to be their diesel of choice.


Diesel
By btc909 on 3/28/2013 12:15:30 PM , Rating: 1
This is a Fiat Diesel, not a Cummings. Piss away your money if you want, if you really want one, LEASE one.




RE: Diesel
By Argon18 on 3/28/2013 12:44:28 PM , Rating: 3
As of February 2011, Fiat purchased a 50% stake in VM Motori, from Penske who was the prior principle investor. That doesn't make it a "Fiat engine". And what is a "Cummings"? Are you thinking of Cummins, but you didn't know how to spell it because you aren't very familiar with diesel engines or automobiles in general?


RE: Diesel
By JediJeb on 3/29/2013 8:16:53 PM , Rating: 2
Yea, "Cummings" always cracks me up when I hear or read it. :)


MPG?
By mavricxx on 4/1/2013 6:08:58 PM , Rating: 2
They should have posted the MPG, I saw the first drive online and it was amazing not to mention it gave like 600 miles distance on a single tank of gas and was like 35 MPG. This Jeep will rock!




"The Space Elevator will be built about 50 years after everyone stops laughing" -- Sir Arthur C. Clarke














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki