Cherokee diesel or something more established?

Tinman · **Joined:** Mon Apr 10, 2006 10:45 am **Posts:** 308

I'll probably be buying the wife a new scooter in the next 12-24 months. I really like the new Cherokee and the diesel should be out by then. Would it be worth considering a longer running model with a history such as the X5, Toureg (or the like, i.e. Cayenne) over a new drive train from our beloved Jeep? More than an hour away from any of the other dealers, Jeep dealer is 10 minutes away. Jeep will have a larger aftermarket including engine performance (I already emailed Keith). Not so for the others. I like the BMW engine (straight 6 with sequential turbos. Also the egr exits the exhaust after the dpf), but really don't like the vehicle (really just a car). One thing I worry about is the inability to defeat emissions and the subsequent consequences of that - pretty much everything discussed on this forum. Any opinions?

Hoosier CRD · **Posted:** Sat Jan 05, 2013 11:11 am

X5s can tank in value, not sure about the Toureag/Q7/Cayenne derivatives.

For me, convenience is a big deal. If the Mother Mopar portal is close by, that would weigh heavily to me. That and aftermarket support.

I've recently spoken with a customer about "Upgrades". The EPA is cracking down on tuners, etc. for diesels with DPFs. Equipment, especially for light-duty diesel trucks, is getting hard to come by and the price is going up accordingly. Some people are buying back up tuners in case the first unit fails. Keep in mind, these are not inexpensive units to begin with. As of 2013, it must be a well documented off-road only vehicle in order to LEGALLY disable emissions equipment

Check to see if the new Cherokee CRD has a DPF, my guess is that it does. Hope this helps.

Hexus · **Posted:** Sat Jan 05, 2013 3:12 pm

My Stepfather and I (He works for Chrysler) were talking about Diesels, and Chrysler/Jeep in General. He has already said this is the last year you can even get a Diesel without a DEF Tank on it, so emissions standards are definitely going up. All of the dealerships sold out of the 2012's very quickly, and there were some people {Companies} who outright bought up the 2012 Diesels 2 years + before their lease was up and paid for storage so they wouldn't have to pay for DEF when their current vehicles gave up the ghost.

Emissions is becoming redundant in the US [I work for a Class I Railroad as well], it's really too bad they don't realize that China could give two craps less about emissions and is operating well in advance of particulate pollution than what we were 70 years ago.

:5SHOTS:

Tinman · **Joined:** Mon Apr 10, 2006 10:45 am **Posts:** 308

The fact I like the Cherokee and a Jeep dealership being close is a big factor, plus it's cheaper that the others.

All diesels starting in 07 have DPF, DOC, SCR , DEF, and Heavy EGR. This is what's killing diesel power now. The 07.5 Cummins non-chassis cabs were an exception. Cummins used more egr and some injection magic to meet the standard without DEF. That is changing in 2013 and they are using DEF, not b/o emissions changes but the increased egr was decreasing mileage to the point of being more costly than the cost of DEF. Cummins was losing out in the cost of operation due to the lack of DEF. So this year they decreased EGR use and added DEF. The Jeep will have it all. Yes the Gestapo is out in force which is why I question a diesel at all if delete isn't an option. I ask Keith about it in my email and he didn't respond to that aspect of my question. The mechanical aspect of delete is easy, the electronics are the problem. Even EFILive (a New Zealand company) is caving.

geordi · **Posted:** Mon Jan 07, 2013 12:05 am

He can't answer, and I don't blame him for ignoring the question. If he did develop something, the EPA nazis would be climbing down his throat and up from the other end, just LOOKING for anything they could use to shut him down. Should they do that while completely ignoring the massive 3-million-cars-worth (PER PLANT!) coal-fired power station emissions in these great United States? Absolutely - Those dirty diesel polluters are the sole reason for the (nonexistent) acid rains. Why should they focus on a STATIONARY power plant (of which there are something like 300 of), when lowering THAT thing's emissions to the level required of the transport sector (cars trucks) would equate to PERMANENTLY removing the emissions of 3 million cars from the road? Again - that is PER PLANT!

If every single person in NYC (about 8 million) owned and drove a car (they don't) - Enforcing the current vehicle air quality standards on JUST THREE coal power plants... Would be like permanently eliminating every one of those cars / taxis / busses from the city's people. Think about that for a minute. Three million cars worth of pollution comes from JUST ONE coal-fired power plant.

Who is the worse polluter?

But the coal industry has lobbying money. The auto industry doesn't give a crap.

naturist · **Posted:** Tue Jan 08, 2013 5:50 pm

Hexus wrote:

. . . it's really too bad they don't realize that China could give two craps less about emissions and is operating well in advance of particulate pollution than what we were 70 years ago.

You've never been to China, have you?

I have, and let me tell you that China is already suffering for lack of concern with environmental quality. I was there for two weeks, In Beijing, Chunking, Xian, and Shanghai, and got to see blue sky for a whopping 3 hours one afternoon. The entire rest of the trip was under gray smog-colored skies, and the sulphur smell of coal burning never left my nostrils until we were on the plane back to 'Frisco. China has a sky-rocketing asthma rate.

You want that here?

God, I hope not.

Cherokee diesel or something more established?

Who is online