LOST JEEPS :: View topic - Why a diesel in the Lib.

it's been stated more than once

Chrysler did the CRD as a test - to see if consumers would buy a diesel
They only pulled enough engines to build the 10 or 11,000 that they sold -
they did not even finish the entire 06 model year - they ran out of engines for the US
(before and after they sold diesel Liberty's in Europe and Australia)

the sales surprised them -
however they responded by building a $42,000 Grand Cherokee instead of a $25,000 Liberty.

There are rumors that the dealerships wanted to kill the CRD because they didn't want to support the diesel,
also that some layers of management didn't want to deal with it.

and there's little evidence to support significant Engineering development
most of the indications are a quick and dirty slap it together with available parts.

I'm not saying that I don't appreciate my CRD - I do
however I'm very frustrated with what I see as a lack of development and a lack of support
and frankly a huge missed opportunity for Chrysler and Jeep

76.3 mpg (combined cycle)...61.4 Urban(city) 88.3 Extra Urban(highway)

The Diesel TJ (liberty/cherokee) was nothing new when we got it.............

Rich wrote:

The Diesel TJ (liberty/cherokee) was nothing new when we got it.............

The US liberty/overseas cherokee is the KJ. The TJ is the 97-06 Wrangler. The XJ is the 84-01 Cherokee. The KK is the 08+ Liberty/cherokee.

GM killed the diesel in anything less then a 3/4 pickups back in the '80's with the 6.2/6.5 gas converts,they left a terrible taste in most mouths with those engines.

I know it has to do with environmental regulations, but I truly do not understand why we cannot have the same engine options here as in EU countries. The EU has tough environmental regulations as well, correct?

tjkj2002 wrote:

GM killed the diesel in anything less then a 3/4 pickups back in the '80's with the 6.2/6.5 gas converts,they left a terrible taste in most mouths with those engines.

TJ, what killed the diesel auto in the US was Chebbies 5.7 (350) conversion from gasser to diesel. The engines granaded. You cant convert a gasser into a diesel and expect it to survive!

Author:	ac5501 [ Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:59 pm ]
Post subject:	Why a diesel in the Lib.
I posted this as a response on the TDI club forum. I thought it would be interesting to see some of the opinions on this site, so I will place it here as well. Basically, I have always been amazed (happily so) that Chrysler even bothered to put a diesel in the Liberty. Consider this: The stricter diesel emissions(the supposed reason the CRD lib was canceled) that went into affect in 07 were known well in advance. This means: Chrysler had to have known that the diesel Lib. would only be in production for less than 2 years. How many car companies would go through the cost introducing a "new" type of engine into an existing vehicle knowing up front that the production run would be less than 2 years. Costs like engineering, testing, establishing parts supply chain, training dealers and much more. Maybe I don't know enough about car making, but that seems like a collosal waste of money. Especially knowing from the very beginning that the production run would never recoup the costs of development. I am still glad they did it though

Author:	ATXKJ [ Wed Aug 12, 2009 3:56 pm ]
Post subject:
it's been stated more than once Chrysler did the CRD as a test - to see if consumers would buy a diesel They only pulled enough engines to build the 10 or 11,000 that they sold - they did not even finish the entire 06 model year - they ran out of engines for the US (before and after they sold diesel Liberty's in Europe and Australia) the sales surprised them - however they responded by building a $42,000 Grand Cherokee instead of a $25,000 Liberty. There are rumors that the dealerships wanted to kill the CRD because they didn't want to support the diesel, also that some layers of management didn't want to deal with it. and there's little evidence to support significant Engineering development most of the indications are a quick and dirty slap it together with available parts. I'm not saying that I don't appreciate my CRD - I do however I'm very frustrated with what I see as a lack of development and a lack of support and frankly a huge missed opportunity for Chrysler and Jeep

Author:	CRD Joe [ Wed Aug 12, 2009 5:03 pm ]
Post subject:
ATXKJ wrote: it's been stated more than once Chrysler did the CRD as a test - to see if consumers would buy a diesel They only pulled enough engines to build the 10 or 11,000 that they sold - they did not even finish the entire 06 model year - they ran out of engines for the US (before and after they sold diesel Liberty's in Europe and Australia) the sales surprised them - however they responded by building a $42,000 Grand Cherokee instead of a $25,000 Liberty. There are rumors that the dealerships wanted to kill the CRD because they didn't want to support the diesel, also that some layers of management didn't want to deal with it. and there's little evidence to support significant Engineering development most of the indications are a quick and dirty slap it together with available parts. I'm not saying that I don't appreciate my CRD - I do however I'm very frustrated with what I see as a lack of development and a lack of support and frankly a huge missed opportunity for Chrysler and Jeep X2!

Author:	Joe Romas [ Wed Aug 12, 2009 6:34 pm ]
Post subject:
If you go to the VM site http://www.vmmotori.it/en/01/00/index.jsp open the "automotive" tab and check current and past applications you'll see Chrysler used VM diesel engines as far back as 1992 in the Cherokee, Durango and caravan along with many other applications by other makers. Not to mention the updated version used in new wranglers

Author:	warp2diesel [ Wed Aug 12, 2009 6:56 pm ]
Post subject:	Detroit Mindset
My brother is a Fuel Systems Engineer for Ford and he has done little to nothing with Diesels. In spite of great sales of Diesel Powered Vans, SUVs, and Pickups the Stupid Management does not like them and see development as a liability. Many dealers (but not all) look at the Service Department as a place to prop up sales instead of a profit center and charge the service department for more than their share of the utilities, Rent or Real Estate Taxes with out giving them their share of the parts revenue. Having to investing in more tools that they can't stick the technicians for and make them pay for out of their pay checks to be able to service Diesels is a Mega bitching fest for the dealers. Add to that a bunch of Recreational Drug Users (Not Viagra) who are having input into the regulations and laws that the EPA runs under and you have the Anti Diesel Cluster EFF we are in now. Now Ya All Know why Gopher Holes have TP around them, it ain't the Gophers doing it.

LOST JEEPS http://www.lostjeeps.com/forum/phpBB3/

Why a diesel in the Lib. http://www.lostjeeps.com/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=45793	Page 1 of 2

Author:	mikey1273 [ Wed Aug 12, 2009 10:35 pm ]
Post subject:
I just got my CRD Last Friday. It is my first diesel ever. So far I like it. yeah its a little louder than gas but my jeep should be getting near the same MPG as the Subaru outback it replaced. Plug the engine feels very well matched to the jeep, it has tons ot torque. my subaru was lighter and had 165 hp H4 gas engine in it I don't know how much torque it made but the turbo diesel feels more powerful overall. I wish it cought on better and they were still selling it new so more drivers could see this.

Author:	Rich [ Wed Aug 12, 2009 11:21 pm ]
Post subject:
Two words... American Public That is the ONLY reason there are very few passenger type cars powered by a diesel engine. Sit at an open cafe, anywhere in Europe, and log the ratio of diesel to gas engines that drive past. The Diesel TJ (liberty/cherokee) was nothing new when we got it, and it didn't die when the US market failed to keep it. The US market tends to get the bottom rung of the automotive world, contrary to what most believe. When I lived in Japan, my '96 Mitsubishi Legnum had features that was the NEW TECHNOLOGY for the US market on the Lancer Evolution X, which came out last year. I personally blame the auto buying public for not DEMANDING what the rest of the world gets as standard options. Maybe with the Big Three going belly up, they will start binging over what we should already have. This is EXACTLY what I am talking about; http://www.ford.co.uk/Cars/NewFiesta/NewFiestaECOnetic Here, let me cut to the chase.... Quote: 76.3 mpg (combined cycle)...61.4 Urban(city) 88.3 Extra Urban(highway) Sorry, I get really worked up about this subject.

Author:	Sir Sam [ Thu Aug 13, 2009 12:30 am ]
Post subject:
Rich wrote: The Diesel TJ (liberty/cherokee) was nothing new when we got it............. The US liberty/overseas cherokee is the KJ. The TJ is the 97-06 Wrangler. The XJ is the 84-01 Cherokee. The KK is the 08+ Liberty/cherokee.

Author:	Lancer [ Thu Aug 13, 2009 5:37 am ]
Post subject:
The diesel in Europe comment above is a fair one. I run a CRD, and much as I like the KJ, I wouldn't have bought it if it didn't have a diesel engine. I suspect that most KJs in Europe are diesel engined - with our fuel prices, you have to have very deep(and full!!) pockets to run a petrol - engined 4x4 on a daily basis. Most people here who buy JKs want a diesel, which is why Chrysler made sure it was available on launch. One of the comments made against the Hummer H3 when it was introduced here (apart from the godawful ride and interior) was that absence of a diesel option would severely limit its appeal, as the petrol engine had such appalling (for Europe) fuel consumption.

Author:	linewarbr [ Thu Aug 13, 2009 8:27 am ]
Post subject:
I know it has to do with environmental regulations, but I truly do not understand why we cannot have the same engine options here as in EU countries. The EU has tough environmental regulations as well, correct? As long as we don't also have to have EU fuel prices. But then again, I guess you can't have the best of both worlds, right? I think Chrysler/ Jeep hit the nail on the head with the KJ CRD in the US. If a consumer wanted to buy a diesel-engine vehicle, their choices prior to the KJ were very few - 3/4 ton or larger domestic pickup, a huge Excursion or full-size van, or a VW Toureg V10 TDI. (all of whom offer fuel mileage in the mid-to-high teens) On the far other end of the spectrum, a VW Jetta or Golf (or Passat in 2004 and 2005) offering high fuel mileage, but no off-road capability. then you have the $50K+ Mercedes diesels. With the KJ, you could get it all - (comparitively) great fuel mileage, affordability, off-road capability, towing capacity, and all in a package that still fits in the garage at night. I, in part, blame the culture of the Big 3 automakers. Of course, we have all talked about the short-sightedness and failure to recognize the KJ CRD as a profit center, etc. But recently, NPR was doing a series of segments about the Big 3, and they mentioned a man (I cannot remember his name) who was responsible for "stratifying" the GM lineup - where Chevy was the entry line, then Pontiac, then Buick, up to Cadillac, etc. This fellow was also responsible for instituting the idea of "planned obsolescence." the business plan where you design a vehicle to need replacement after a 3 to 7 year time span. In short, I think diesel-engine options are seen, or have been seen, as a threat to the corporate business plan of "planned obsolescence" in America. How can a consumer be ready to replace a vehicle in 5 years that has a 15-year+ lifespan? How can the Big 3 establish pricing for a vehicle that way, when every other vehicle they offer in their lineup is designed and engineered out of this culture? Simply put, they cannot. So. if that is the case, the resistance is not to diesel engines per se, but the resistance is to change, pure and simple. To change is to admit that your way is not already the best; human pride, made a cultural institution in a corporation, simply cannot allow that until all other options or imminent failure is the unavoidable . They made that bed, and now they are lying in it. We've seen other automakers be successful, even lucratively so, in the US market by offering cars that did not fall under the culture of planned obsolescence - Toyota and Honda come to mind. It is a crying shame, and a failure of culture, that over 30 years of rustbucket crappy products (yes I know that is a generalization) and declining market share, these large American corporations still only constantly sought the Band-Aid, the quick fix, to stop the hemmoraging rather than run the risk of a top-to-bottom shakup and realigning of culture. So, it is still short-sightedness, it is still stupidity and poor management, but I think it is something to do with the reason as to why. (Steps off soapbox)

Author:	stoutdog [ Thu Aug 13, 2009 9:21 am ]
Post subject:
x2 linewarbr, x2

Author:	tjkj2002 [ Thu Aug 13, 2009 9:48 am ]
Post subject:
GM killed the diesel in anything less then a 3/4 pickups back in the '80's with the 6.2/6.5 gas converts,they left a terrible taste in most mouths with those engines.

Author:	Rich [ Thu Aug 13, 2009 11:43 am ]
Post subject:
Sir Sam wrote: Rich wrote: The Diesel TJ (liberty/cherokee) was nothing new when we got it............. The US liberty/overseas cherokee is the KJ. The TJ is the 97-06 Wrangler. The XJ is the 84-01 Cherokee. The KK is the 08+ Liberty/cherokee. How my fingers were fat enough to put a TJ, and not a KJ in the correct position is beyond me. I stand correct, and thank you for pointing out my obvious mistake.... can we call it newbiedom? My first jeep was an XJ, and now I am selling a DJ-5D that is sitting at my father's place in CA. I feel until my fellow Americans pull their heads out far enough to see the light of day, there will be little to no change in the Big Three's business plan. GM options diesels, and other forms of efficient engines (1.4l gas, 1.7L CTDi) into there cars under the Opel and Vauxhaull badges and has done so for years. These same exact platforms and sometimes cars are sold in the US with far LESS options. Sometimes they don't even change the name on the car. The same exact thing goes on in Ford and Chrysler, yet they wonder why the export markets of the Big Three are doing well enough to support the domestic market. I would love to see Saturn toss the 1.7L or 1.9L CTDi in the Astra. Advertise the crap out of the fact that the 1.7L CTDi has the same gas milage as the Prius, and only about 20% higher CO2 emissions, yet costs about the same AND poses less of an environmental impact than the manufacture of a single Prius. Than again, I can see why the Big Three did what they did. They were making a BIG profit off times of cheap oil and inflated credit market. When that house of cards came crumbling down, they were caught with their pants down. Only companies who dared go against the grain and introduce/continue to build efficient cars designed to last are doing well. Something tells me that history is repeating itself. Can anyone say "Chrysler in the 80's?" Too bad the "K-Car" of the future will need to last much longer and get more than 20mpg. Blah.... and they wonder why I am going back to school.

Author:	CRD Joe [ Thu Aug 13, 2009 12:00 pm ]
Post subject:
tjkj2002 wrote: GM killed the diesel in anything less then a 3/4 pickups back in the '80's with the 6.2/6.5 gas converts,they left a terrible taste in most mouths with those engines. TJ, what killed the diesel auto in the US was Chebbies 5.7 (350) conversion from gasser to diesel. The engines granaded. You cant convert a gasser into a diesel and expect it to survive!

Author:	danoid [ Thu Aug 13, 2009 12:02 pm ]
Post subject:
Development of KJ (US spec) CRD... German DCX executive, "Ve haff to sell ze Diesel. Ve vill make ze Diesel for you." American DCX executive, "Been there, done that, we don't want those." German DCX executive, "Ve haff to sell ze Diesel. Ve vill make ze Diesel for you." American DCX executive, "OK, how 'bout we try to pass off what we already make?" German DCX executive, "Ve haff to sell ze Diesel. Ve vill make ze Diesel for you. You vill not buy Diesel made by Italians." American DCX executive, "OK, but nobody will buy it." Development of WK (US spec) 3.0L diesel... German DCX executive, "Ve haff to sell ze Diesel. Ve vill make ze Diesel for you. You vill not buy Diesel made by Italians." American DCX executive, "What will my bonus be?" Enter Cerberus... Cerberus execuve, "Stop spending money." American Chrysler executive, "What will my bonus be?" And in a perfect future world... Fiat executive, "We have diesels." American Chrysler executive, "Been there, done that, we don't want those." Fiat executive, "We have diesels." American Chrysler executive, "OK, how 'bout we try to pass off what we already make?" Fiat executive, "As long as it's in the family." American Chrysler executive, "OK, let's talk about my bonus now..."

Author:	MrMopar64 [ Thu Aug 13, 2009 1:33 pm ]
Post subject:
Tier 2 Bin 5 is still more stringent than the Euro V standards, especially in terms of PM which isn't an issue with a DPF but the upcoming PM2.5 standards dictate not only the permissible mass but the size of the particles as well. Tier 2 Bin 5 is more comparable to Euro VI because the drive cycle that the emissions are measure on are vastly different. The US drive cycles (FTP75, HWFEC, US06, SC03) are much higher load than the european drive cycle (ECE, EUDC) and also higher speeds which are the biggest differences. Even if the standard is the same limit, a Euro V calibration run on a US cycle would fail. Engineering a car for a NAFTA program is a dedicated resource. A NAFTA calibration would likely meet EU regulations, but not the other way around. Additionally, the OBD requirements between the EU and the USA is different and the SW changes necessary to to meet the US OBDII standards requires thousands of thousands of dollars to develop the SW let alone change it.

Author:	Rich [ Thu Aug 13, 2009 11:30 pm ]
Post subject:
[quote="tjkj2002"Which the 6.2/6.5's where also. Now the military is thriving off the 6.2/6.5's since those are used in the HMMWV's.You all may think why not upgrade to a cleaner more fuel efficient diesel,it would be a disaster in the making.The term K.I.S.S. has to be kept in mind with the military since they need to be easy to work on in pretty rough conditions and parts must be plentiful,not to mention JP8 kills those fancy pumps in short order.When I was over in the sandbox I had only 15mins from the time we stopped to the time we had to be rolling again to either fix the dang thing or hook it up to another vehicle(in-tow),99% of the time on the road in Iraq/Afghanistan the only tools really needed(or used) was a Leatherman,duct tape,super glue,and zipties which all where on my armored vest at all times.You couldn't fix a 2.8 in that time or let alone diagnose what went wrong.[/quote] +1 The 6.2's were a dog, couldn't even get my M1025 out of it's own way. Always left a plume of smoke when I put the loud pedal down, or god forbid I had to drag a trailer. Thankfully my butt survived the drive from Udai to Baghdad in a "pioneer armor" 998 with a broken fuel cutoff/governor. I had to pop the hood and crimp the fuel line with my leatherman to get the engine to shut down. After that truck was dubbed "Fobbit" I was issued an M1114 for my around country antics. Even with the billion pounds of armor and crap, that 6.5TD was significantly faster and more powerful. JP8 should never be burned in those trucks, and it sucked at being a "good fuel" for them. When at the "green zone" we would sneak over to the KBR fuel point to get actual Diesel. We would burn a bit hotter, but actually have enough power to push past 75mph. I agree though, most repairs in the field are done by soldiers on the ground, with no diagnostic tools, formal education, and much more than what they carry into combat. Part of my mission brief was always instructing my passengers on where the TCM reset was, and how to use it. I had more of those POS boxes kick out on me than anything. Murphy's law of combat states that the worst possible problem will occur at the worst possible moment. I had a PS line blow on my way through central Baghdad one day. This meant my PS was gone, as was my power brakes, rear diff cooler, and some other important crap. The conversion gasser>diesels ARE crap, but more rednecks can work on a BBC/SBC than any other motor out there, so it is a logical choice imo!

Page 1 of 2	All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/

Author:	Sir Sam [ Thu Aug 13, 2009 1:15 pm ]
Post subject:
linewarbr wrote: I know it has to do with environmental regulations, but I truly do not understand why we cannot have the same engine options here as in EU countries. The EU has tough environmental regulations as well, correct? If you look at the emissions standards tier 2 bin 5, euro V they are nearly the same. The difference is that our emissions went into effect earlier than the euro standards. That means for someone to sell a diesel engine in the US, for a relatively small market, they have to move up their R&D by about 2-3 years to get the bugs worked out on the higher emissions standard. Now they will have to do it eventually for the euro V, but not for a few years more. What this means is that for anyone wanting to sell a diesel in the US, your model that will be good to sell in europe, will be good enough to sell in the US, you just need to do the paperwork to get that tested and approved. (its been awhile since I researched this, so my exact recall of dates and names is maybe not be 100%, but the general concept should still resonate) IIRC, by sept of 09(next month) US emissions and euro emissions will be the same. So after next month, anything you could sell in europe you should be able to sell in the US, albeit after going through the ring of fire in getting that particular vehicle approved.

Author:	ATXKJ [ Thu Aug 13, 2009 5:41 pm ]
Post subject:
Not arguing that there were and are technology issues that had to be dealt with - and will have to be dealt with for future vehicles. However. You have a car company that's been losing market share they test a niche vehicle they sell everything they came make, at a premium price (they were offering discounts on gassers - not on CRD's) and they decide to cancel the program????? That is a basic failure of Management. It was not a technology issue.

Author:	tjkj2002 [ Thu Aug 13, 2009 6:04 pm ]
Post subject:
CRD Joe wrote: tjkj2002 wrote: GM killed the diesel in anything less then a 3/4 pickups back in the '80's with the 6.2/6.5 gas converts,they left a terrible taste in most mouths with those engines. TJ, what killed the diesel auto in the US was Chebbies 5.7 (350) conversion from gasser to diesel. The engines granaded. You cant convert a gasser into a diesel and expect it to survive! Which the 6.2/6.5's where also. Now the military is thriving off the 6.2/6.5's since those are used in the HMMWV's.You all may think why not upgrade to a cleaner more fuel efficient diesel,it would be a disaster in the making.The term K.I.S.S. has to be kept in mind with the military since they need to be easy to work on in pretty rough conditions and parts must be plentiful,not to mention JP8 kills those fancy pumps in short order.When I was over in the sandbox I had only 15mins from the time we stopped to the time we had to be rolling again to either fix the dang thing or hook it up to another vehicle(in-tow),99% of the time on the road in Iraq/Afghanistan the only tools really needed(or used) was a Leatherman,duct tape,super glue,and zipties which all where on my armored vest at all times.You couldn't fix a 2.8 in that time or let alone diagnose what went wrong.