Official: 2014 Jeep Grand Cherokee Diesel
- Thread starter Jorsn
- Start date
Lots of photos of the new Grand Cherokee here
http://www.trucktrend.com/roadtests/suv/163_1301_2014_jeep_grand_cherokee_first_look/index.html
http://www.trucktrend.com/roadtests/suv/163_1301_2014_jeep_grand_cherokee_first_look/index.html
kylemackechnie
New member
in Australia, we get the 2.8L diesel JK, so i dont see why they wouldn't sell it in the States.
grimbo
Explorer
Very different emissions standards and very different markets
brianjwilson
Some sort of lost...
Our emissions standards on diesels requires a lot of additional equipment, diesel particulate filters, urea injection etc etc and normally have lower output/higher consumption. More complexity with this stuff, variable geometry turbos, high pressure fuel pumps and poor diesel lubricity all mean less reliability and higher maintenance costs. Our diesel is also generally more expensive than regular gasoline. Spending an extra $5-7k on a Diesel engine is hard to justify unless there is a very large increase in economy AND performance, and one intends to keep the car for a long time.
In short, it sort of becomes a novelty to have a diesel here unless you're towing a lot with a big truck, unfortunately. I love diesels but the EPA is killing them. That and the automakers are making more fuel efficient gasoline engines with turbos and direct injection with lower cost. We have a 2010 VW golf turbo diesel and its been a great car, now with 45k miles. Just oil and filter changes, fuel filter changes and tires, great power, easily makes 42mpg at 70-80 mph. But it also wasn't terribly expensive at around $23 well equipped. I'd love to have a turbo diesel in my Wrangler (I say MY wrangler because I probably won't buy another one based on overall quality and cost), but I would have to make sense with a substantial MPG and drivability improvement without a $5-7k price tag.
In short, it sort of becomes a novelty to have a diesel here unless you're towing a lot with a big truck, unfortunately. I love diesels but the EPA is killing them. That and the automakers are making more fuel efficient gasoline engines with turbos and direct injection with lower cost. We have a 2010 VW golf turbo diesel and its been a great car, now with 45k miles. Just oil and filter changes, fuel filter changes and tires, great power, easily makes 42mpg at 70-80 mph. But it also wasn't terribly expensive at around $23 well equipped. I'd love to have a turbo diesel in my Wrangler (I say MY wrangler because I probably won't buy another one based on overall quality and cost), but I would have to make sense with a substantial MPG and drivability improvement without a $5-7k price tag.
reece146
Automotive Artist
Dan Grec
Expedition Leader
brianjwilson said:
It's amazing to note comments like this on a post that confirms as 100% fact that Jeep now have a 3.0 Turbo Diesel that meets the new EPA emissions standards.
It's now blatantly clear the only thing stopping a diesel Wrangler in North America is Jeep making the decision to offer that.
The EPA and emissions have nothing to do with it anymore.
-Dan
Like I said... Jeep would be losing money if they offered a diesel in the Wrangler.
It's one thing to offer a diesel in a luxury suv, It's another to offer it in a $21-$30K jeep wrangler. The engine would add an additional $5-7K and a small fraction of wrangler owners would actually pay that. I'm sure they have gone over this plenty of times and realized that there isn't enough profit there to justify putting a diesel in a wrangler. They aren't not doing it just to piss owners off.
I will be shocked if this new diesel makes up more than 10% of their Grand Cherokee sales here in the US.
Dan Grec
Expedition Leader
That's up for debate, though the most important point still remains:
This is now entirely Jeep's decision to be made. The EPA and emissions standards have nothing to do with it.
-Dan
SSF556
SE Expedition Society
And if people are willing to finance a $45,000 fully loaded Rubicon...why not a $50,000 Rubicon diesel....People are spending $60,000+ on AEV JKUs.....
SouthPawXJ
Observer
The engine that fits in the Wrangler (2.8L) in its current form DOES NOT meet emission requirements in the United States, because it was developed for the previous requirements in Europe. The Wrangler is not designed to accommodate the 3.0L going into the Grand Cherokee. The Grand Cherokee (in Europe) already had the VM Motori 3.0L diesel under the hood. This means the design work has already been done for this particular engine in that particular car. Its probably more of a case like the 5.7L Hemi - it CAN fit, but Jeep cannot fit it and meet safety standards, packaging requirements, and avoid an expensive redesign. I don't blame Jeep for not doing this on the current Wrangler. If Jeep does not put a diesel in the next Wrangler, it will be on them then. Sergio Marchionne, the CEO of Chrysler Group LLC and Fiat (who owns 50% of VM Motori), said that more diesel engines would be coming. News here: http://www.allpar.com/news/index.php/2013/01/us-to-get-smaller-diesels
Dan Grec
Expedition Leader
Thanks for the info.
What makes you think the 3.0 won't fit in the Wrangler? My understanding is the firewall and structural changes made in 2012 were to allow for exactly that - shorter engines like inline 4's or V6's or V8's.
What doesn't fit anymore are inline 6's or 8's. Lots of compaines are shoving Hemis in there, so I think the 3.0 would fit.
For anyone as seriously excited by this engine as I am, have a look what the Banks guys are doing with it, making a seriously built version for the military.
http://www.dieselpowermag.com/tech/1208dp_banks_vm_motori_630t_v6_diesel_engine/
Looks like it will be available to the public.
-Dan
Dan Grec
Expedition Leader
At the motor show, they said:
"Jeep estimates the diesel to account for about 15 percent of Grand Cherokee sales."
So they decided to go ahead with the R&D and all that for only 15%...
-Dan
brianjwilson
Some sort of lost...
That's one way to read it. I think any of the manufacturers CAN make a diesel meeting standards, the point is it becomes very expensive, less reliable, less efficient and diesel is still more expensive. So in a way, the EPA and emission standards have everything to do with it. Not impossible, but more expensive and less practical. Generally in this country diesels only get marketed to higher end ($$$) vehicles.
They mark up the wrangler so much, it really is a terrible value for what you get IMO. And I own a brand new well equipped rubicon. Either they have to REALLY mark up a diesel option to make it worth their time (ie more profitable than the GC) or it just doesn't make financial sense. If they make more profit off of the 3.6 then they would with a diesel, why would they offer it? I don't think there is any compitetion to the wrangler, certainly none with a diesel. Are wrangler buyers going to buy something else because they don't offer a diesel? Doubtful. I hope they do but I'm not getting my hopes up. They certainly can, but will they? The GC diesel is probably competing against high end foreign turbo diesel SUVs. Different game.
Dan Grec
Expedition Leader
But the existence of the GC diesel shows Jeep have already spent all that time and money getting it certified and built, so all those barriers are removed.
-Dan