| LOST JEEPS http://www.lostjeeps.com/forum/phpBB3/ |
|
| 2005 Liberty CRD vs. 2009 Liberty 3.7 AT (L02) Fuel consumpt http://www.lostjeeps.com/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=81090 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | hgrimberg [ Mon Jan 12, 2015 9:37 pm ] |
| Post subject: | 2005 Liberty CRD vs. 2009 Liberty 3.7 AT (L02) Fuel consumpt |
I am thinking about changing my 2005 Liberty CRD 2.8 for a 2009 Liberty 3.7 AT (L02) (gasoline) and I am concerned about fuel consumption being worst on the latter. Is it so? Will I be spending more money on gasoline? Thank you |
|
| Author: | mecne [ Mon Jan 12, 2015 9:46 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 2005 Liberty CRD vs. 2009 Liberty 3.7 AT (L02) Fuel cons |
hgrimberg wrote: I am thinking about changing my 2005 Liberty CRD 2.8 for a 2009 Liberty 3.7 AT (L02) (gasoline) and I am concerned about fuel consumption being worst on the latter. Is it so? Will I be spending more money on gasoline? Thank you I've used this site many time when getting an idea of fuel mileage on vehicles . http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=sbs&id=22529&id=26184&id=16718 |
|
| Author: | thermorex [ Mon Jan 12, 2015 10:45 pm ] |
| Post subject: | 2005 Liberty CRD vs. 2009 Liberty 3.7 AT (L02) Fuel consumpt |
I once had a girlfriend with a white kk 3.7. She was getting about 12-15 mpg city drive in Cleveland winter with about 20-ish highway. Not sure how much you get with the Crd, and what's the shape of your lil' puffer (to quote gmctd), but $/mile wise, you'll probably be around the same or close (a bit worse maybe but not much) with a gasoline. On highway though, with a light foot I believe the Crd has the win. Kk looks way better in my opinion than the kj, but that's a matter of taste... |
|
| Author: | hgrimberg [ Tue Jan 13, 2015 4:39 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 2005 Liberty CRD vs. 2009 Liberty 3.7 AT (L02) Fuel cons |
mecne wrote: hgrimberg wrote: I am thinking about changing my 2005 Liberty CRD 2.8 for a 2009 Liberty 3.7 AT (L02) (gasoline) and I am concerned about fuel consumption being worst on the latter. Is it so? Will I be spending more money on gasoline? Thank you I've used this site many time when getting an idea of fuel mileage on vehicles . http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=sbs&id=22529&id=26184&id=16718 Well, according to this site, the KJ gets 21 mpg whereas the KK gets only 17 mpg... a big difference then... But isn't the KK a Hemi engine that becomes a smaller engine if you are not needing the extra power? |
|
| Author: | thermorex [ Tue Jan 13, 2015 5:25 pm ] |
| Post subject: | 2005 Liberty CRD vs. 2009 Liberty 3.7 AT (L02) Fuel consumpt |
No, kk does not have hemi. Nor it stops fuel delivery on selective injectors. If you drive city most of the time, the costs are about the same, as diesel is 1+ more per gallon and maintenance is a bit more expensive than gasoline 3.7. If you drive highway mostly, keep the kj Crd. |
|
| Author: | tjkj2002 [ Tue Jan 13, 2015 7:49 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 2005 Liberty CRD vs. 2009 Liberty 3.7 AT (L02) Fuel cons |
hgrimberg wrote: I am thinking about changing my 2005 Liberty CRD 2.8 for a 2009 Liberty 3.7 AT (L02) (gasoline) and I am concerned about fuel consumption being worst on the latter. Is it so? Will I be spending more money on gasoline? Thank you With the offset fuel cost(gas being way cheaper then diesel) and cheaper maintenance costs the gasser KK will come out cheaper to run per mile then a CRD for the long run. |
|
| Author: | weeks101 [ Tue Jan 13, 2015 9:55 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 2005 Liberty CRD vs. 2009 Liberty 3.7 AT (L02) Fuel cons |
Lots of factors at play (driving style, vehicle configuration, fuel prices, geographic location, weather, traffic, etc. etc.), but in general you'll get roughly 400-500 miles per tank from the CRD and roughly 200-300 miles per tank from the 3.7 petrol. The mileage for both will be worse in the winter or with lots of city driving and/or lots of A/C use. This past summer, went up north 150 miles, spent the entire next day wheeling (low-speeds, in part-time 4x4, hilly and uneven terrain), drove home the following day 150 miles and still had 1/4 tank of diesel left when I got home. My 4.0 XJ (comparable mileage and fuel tank size to 3.7 KJ) would have to stop at least twice for fuel on the same exact trip. So for me, it's not just about the $. I prefer the attributes of the diesel beyond just fuel economy (torque, range, etc.). |
|
| Author: | hgrimberg [ Wed Jan 14, 2015 1:41 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 2005 Liberty CRD vs. 2009 Liberty 3.7 AT (L02) Fuel cons |
Well, I am surprised to know that in the US the diesel is more expensive than gas. Actually it should be cheaper since the process to obtain diesel fuel is simpler and that is why you need a more complex engine to make it run. In my country gas and diesel fuel cost the same nowadays so I guess the CRD is still a lot better moneywise... |
|
| Author: | hgrimberg [ Wed Jan 14, 2015 1:45 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 2005 Liberty CRD vs. 2009 Liberty 3.7 AT (L02) Fuel cons |
The other option to not be spending a fortune in gasoline could be to get a natural gas tank and run on gas... Is it a pitty to do this with this luxury car? Will it ruin the engine? |
|
| Author: | thermorex [ Wed Jan 14, 2015 8:53 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 2005 Liberty CRD vs. 2009 Liberty 3.7 AT (L02) Fuel cons |
hgrimberg wrote: Well, I am surprised to know that in the US the diesel is more expensive than gas. Actually it should be cheaper since the process to obtain diesel fuel is simpler and that is why you need a more complex engine to make it run. In my country gas and diesel fuel cost the same nowadays so I guess the CRD is still a lot better moneywise... The excuse is that ulsd is more expensive to produce, so that's why it's more expensive. I call this bs, but what can we do... Start cursing/protesting and get arrested by big brother? |
|
| Author: | thermorex [ Wed Jan 14, 2015 8:56 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 2005 Liberty CRD vs. 2009 Liberty 3.7 AT (L02) Fuel cons |
hgrimberg wrote: The other option to not be spending a fortune in gasoline could be to get a natural gas tank and run on gas... Is it a pitty to do this with this luxury car? Will it ruin the engine? You can have natural gas in any engine, and it doesn't need to be exclusively running on natural gas. You can have kits installed to work in tandem with the gasoline or Diesel engine, reducing fuel consumption by 30-60% if I remember correctly, depending on engine type (newer get better, older less). |
|
| Author: | hgrimberg [ Wed Jan 14, 2015 12:52 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 2005 Liberty CRD vs. 2009 Liberty 3.7 AT (L02) Fuel cons |
thermorex wrote: hgrimberg wrote: The other option to not be spending a fortune in gasoline could be to get a natural gas tank and run on gas... Is it a pitty to do this with this luxury car? Will it ruin the engine? You can have natural gas in any engine, and it doesn't need to be exclusively running on natural gas. You can have kits installed to work in tandem with the gasoline or Diesel engine, reducing fuel consumption by 30-60% if I remember correctly, depending on engine type (newer get better, older less). Diesel fuel was always cheaper that gasoline in my country and I think the same for Europe and that is why so many manufacturers started to produce diesel engines for cars. As for the natural gas tank on the KK 3.7, there are kits that can work in tandem but don't they damage the engines in general? |
|
| Author: | thermorex [ Wed Jan 14, 2015 2:11 pm ] |
| Post subject: | 2005 Liberty CRD vs. 2009 Liberty 3.7 AT (L02) Fuel consumpt |
In Europe, as I know from my dad that lives there, the diesel is also more expensive than gasoline. They are all a bunch of crooks, lol. Regarding damaging the engine, I do not think so, if there is a good quality kit and it is properly adjusted, I haven't heard of any problems. The natural gas will enter the intake to replace some of the air and will increase combustion temperatures this resulting in leaner burn and less fuel delivered since natural gas is also fuel. Not sure if the ecm needs any adjustment though, but what vendors advertise is that it doesn't and as soon as you'II run out of natural gas in the tank you'll resume the normal vehicle operation without natural gas. |
|
| Author: | hgrimberg [ Sat Jan 17, 2015 5:16 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 2005 Liberty CRD vs. 2009 Liberty 3.7 AT (L02) Fuel cons |
And what about safety? Is it safe to have a gas tank in the trunk on a hot summer day leaving the car parked at the beach for example? |
|
| Author: | thermorex [ Sat Jan 17, 2015 7:27 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 2005 Liberty CRD vs. 2009 Liberty 3.7 AT (L02) Fuel cons |
A proper tank and kit will hold that without issues. |
|
| Author: | tjkj2002 [ Sat Jan 17, 2015 11:26 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 2005 Liberty CRD vs. 2009 Liberty 3.7 AT (L02) Fuel cons |
thermorex wrote: hgrimberg wrote: Well, I am surprised to know that in the US the diesel is more expensive than gas. Actually it should be cheaper since the process to obtain diesel fuel is simpler and that is why you need a more complex engine to make it run. In my country gas and diesel fuel cost the same nowadays so I guess the CRD is still a lot better moneywise... The excuse is that ulsd is more expensive to produce, so that's why it's more expensive. I call this bs, but what can we do... Start cursing/protesting and get arrested by big brother? Supply and demand 101............... More demand for diesel so it's more $$$$,nothing in the world get's moved without diesel so the demand is far greater then gas by a very long shot. |
|
| Author: | CIMARRON13 [ Sun Jan 18, 2015 10:18 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 2005 Liberty CRD vs. 2009 Liberty 3.7 AT (L02) Fuel cons |
tjkj2002 wrote: thermorex wrote: hgrimberg wrote: Well, I am surprised to know that in the US the diesel is more expensive than gas. Actually it should be cheaper since the process to obtain diesel fuel is simpler and that is why you need a more complex engine to make it run. In my country gas and diesel fuel cost the same nowadays so I guess the CRD is still a lot better moneywise... The excuse is that ulsd is more expensive to produce, so that's why it's more expensive. I call this bs, but what can we do... Start cursing/protesting and get arrested by big brother? Supply and demand 101............... More demand for diesel so it's more $$$$,nothing in the world get's moved without diesel so the demand is far greater then gas by a very long shot. Yup, your right on it. Have you seen how much more diesel is at truck stops than regular auto only stations. It's literally highway robbery. |
|
| Author: | thermorex [ Mon Jan 19, 2015 12:55 am ] |
| Post subject: | 2005 Liberty CRD vs. 2009 Liberty 3.7 AT (L02) Fuel consumpt |
tjkj2002 wrote: thermorex wrote: hgrimberg wrote: Well, I am surprised to know that in the US the diesel is more expensive than gas. Actually it should be cheaper since the process to obtain diesel fuel is simpler and that is why you need a more complex engine to make it run. In my country gas and diesel fuel cost the same nowadays so I guess the CRD is still a lot better moneywise... The excuse is that ulsd is more expensive to produce, so that's why it's more expensive. I call this bs, but what can we do... Start cursing/protesting and get arrested by big brother? Supply and demand 101............... More demand for diesel so it's more $$$$,nothing in the world get's moved without diesel so the demand is far greater then gas by a very long shot. Tj, before ulsd, diesel was less than gasoline as I remember, I'm talking 80s-90s. I do believe that ulsd is more expensive to produce though, but the price we pay I think is way too big. Even now, most diesel is at $3+ as gasoline barely gets to $2 in Cleveland area. I did find few pumps with 2.6/gal, lucky I have friends that have diesel, lol. |
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|