I tapped out!

Drewd · **Joined:** Mon Feb 06, 2006 12:24 pm **Posts:** 902

After 10 years of ownership, it is with a heavy heart that we sent our Libby away with its new owners. I feel like we lost a family member and I wish that one day car buyers will have the option of buying something similar. My dream is to one day to find a low mileage KJ CRD in a barn and I would sell my replacement vehicle in a heartbeat!

Some comments about my 10 years of ownership:

Although it had a lot of easily repairable problems, I do consider it one of the best and most reliable vehicles I have ever owned. It only stranded me once in 162k miles of ownership and that was at 104k when the torque converter ate itself. I was able to limp it into work and was only 5 minutes late when that happened.

I never had a vehicle before that had a radiator or alternator last 162k miles.

I consider the KJ CRD the best snow vehicle I have ever owned. I could drive this little tractor in areas that were best ridden on snowmobiles without worry of getting stuck.

Although not the most comfortable vehicle, e.g. seats, it has served me well on long trips cross country several times.

I towed my first camper with it, a 15 foot hardshelled popup. It did well towing except the tranny did overheat when going from Durango to Silverton in passes that required the vehicle be in 2nd or 3rd gear which mean the tranny torque converter never locked up creating extra heat. A cooldown was all it needed before we continued on our way.

I put thousands of miles on it towing my snowmobiles and ATVs over the years and it did so reliably and safely.

It is very maneuverable and its small size made it especially fun to drive.

Turbo is original at 162k miles and only has the slightest fore/aft play with no side to side play.

It had great power with a GDE tune and was fun blasting up mountains passes at 70mph+ while others struggled to maintain 45mph.

It has the distinction of running over my wife's foot when she forgot to put it into park and got out of the car when it was still in reverse. It took a lot of pounding and searching junk yards to find a decent replacement door that almost got torn off when the door caught a barrier post.

It has probably the best group of forum experts of any vehicle I have ever owned.

THANKS AGAIN TO EVERYONE HERE. You are a great bunch of people and your advice and assistance has meant a lot to me over the years. I'll still visit only because I want to see if anyone has made it past 300k miles without having to replace lifters or rockers.

rankom · **Posted:** Mon Sep 12, 2016 8:05 pm

wow that is a nice story, i don't know why they discontinued this thing , honestly this CRD jeep got people from all over world to get here and just enjoy life . yes we had bad times ,we want to burn it one day and , oh well next day we fix it . all it takes , go on this web site and problem solved . hope you find one with low miles and we see you again ,,

thermorex · **Posted:** Mon Sep 12, 2016 9:27 pm

Jeep is a life thing Drewd, you know it, you'll get another one, sooner or later, hopefully another diesel, it's like a virus that keeps coming back. Good luck to you!

thermorex · **Posted:** Mon Sep 12, 2016 9:29 pm

Btw, you got a replacement, or you just sold it?

Sir Sam · **Posted:** Mon Sep 12, 2016 10:16 pm

Drewd wrote:

My dream is to one day to find a low mileage KJ CRD in a barn and I would sell my replacement vehicle in a heartbeat!

55k low enough?

Drewd · **Joined:** Mon Feb 06, 2006 12:24 pm **Posts:** 902

Sir Sam wrote:

Drewd wrote:

My dream is to one day to find a low mileage KJ CRD in a barn and I would sell my replacement vehicle in a heartbeat!

55k low enough?

Possibly, what does it look like? It have to be under 25k miles for me to seriously consider it. 55k is when all of the little stuff started happening like flow control valve failure, glow plugs, wheel sensor wiring with intermittent faults, cooling fan going out, thermostat failure, etc...etc...etc..

I'm driving a Hyundai Santa Fe Sport with the 2.0 turbo engine. It gets better fuel economy then the KJ CRD and is able to hold 75mph going up Vail Pass. It is rated to tow 3,500 lbs which is plenty enough for my aluminum trailer with 2 Poo sleds, between 1800 and 2000 lbs total. Since its a Hyundai, my kid brother who is very car smart, stated I got rid of a lemon only to replace it with another lemon.

I've already put over 3k miles on the Santa Fe and am liking it more each time I drive it. I offroad in UTVs so don't need a vehicle that does that but the Santa Fe does have a diff lock and hill descent control.

Don't worry about me, I still have an 07 WK CRD and an F350 SCrew Cab with 8' bed as oil burners. BTW, if you live in Colorado or high altitude areas, consider anything but a Ford 6.7L diesel. Mine has problems with the DPF clogging when towing anything above 3,000 lbs. It won't passively regenerate the DPF at 70mph and active DPF regenerations are incomplete causing short intervals between the active regens. Other folks are having the same issue with the 2nd gen 6.7L emissions system.

mass-hole · **Posted:** Tue Sep 13, 2016 5:10 am

Drewd wrote:

Sir Sam wrote:

Drewd wrote:

My dream is to one day to find a low mileage KJ CRD in a barn and I would sell my replacement vehicle in a heartbeat!

55k low enough?

Possibly, what does it look like? It have to be under 25k miles for me to seriously consider it. 55k is when all of the little stuff started happening like flow control valve failure, glow plugs, wheel sensor wiring with intermittent faults, cooling fan going out, thermostat failure, etc...etc...etc..

I'm driving a Hyundai Santa Fe Sport with the 2.0 turbo engine. It gets better fuel economy then the KJ CRD and is able to hold 75mph going up Vail Pass. It is rated to tow 3,500 lbs which is plenty enough for my aluminum trailer with 2 Poo sleds, between 1800 and 2000 lbs total. Since its a Hyundai, my kid brother who is very car smart, stated I got rid of a lemon only to replace it with another lemon.

I've already put over 3k miles on the Santa Fe and am liking it more each time I drive it. I offroad in UTVs so don't need a vehicle that does that but the Santa Fe does have a diff lock and hill descent control.

Don't worry about me, I still have an 07 WK CRD and an F350 SCrew Cab with 8' bed as oil burners. BTW, if you live in Colorado or high altitude areas, consider anything but a Ford 6.7L diesel. Mine has problems with the DPF clogging when towing anything above 3,000 lbs. It won't passively regenerate the DPF at 70mph and active DPF regenerations are incomplete causing short intervals between the active regens. Other folks are having the same issue with the 2nd gen 6.7L emissions system.

I can't believe that wouldn't be true of all diesels at altitude. It's not like they put 20% overhead in the tuning for altitude. They def didn't on these liberties and I cannot seeing them leave that much on the table in a competitive truck market like the power stroke where every ft-lb counts. You get to altitude and you've gotta dial back the boost so it's gonna burn richer and clog up the dpf.

Ceearedeedriver · **Joined:** Fri May 06, 2016 8:44 pm **Posts:** 177

Drewd wrote:

Since its a Hyundai, my kid brother who is very car smart, stated I got rid of a lemon only to replace it with another lemon.

There's nothing wrong with Hyundai. As of last weekend I now own 3 of them. Yeah, they're designed to find their way back to the dealer on a regular basis but if you DIY your maintenance, parts are cheap and readily available e.g. I just did the TB, WP, tensioner, idler and serpentines on the eldest for ~$100 in parts.

Drewd · **Joined:** Mon Feb 06, 2006 12:24 pm **Posts:** 902

I'm not too worried about the Hyundai Santa Fe 2.0T. I learned from owning a Jeep which I consider lower than average quality and reliability that more frequent maintenance intervals should help. Plus, I'm strictly highway driving 60 miles each way each day and I know highway miles are much easier on engines, turbos, and suspension components.

My goal on this vehicle is 200k and I'm hoping it won't be as "needy" as a KJ or WK with regards to unplanned maintenance.

geordi · **Posted:** Tue Sep 13, 2016 10:09 pm

mass-hole wrote:

I can't believe that wouldn't be true of all diesels at altitude. It's not like they put 20% overhead in the tuning for altitude. They def didn't on these liberties and I cannot seeing them leave that much on the table in a competitive truck market like the power stroke where every ft-lb counts. You get to altitude and you've gotta dial back the boost so it's gonna burn richer and clog up the dpf.

AFAIK, boosted engines don't need any adjustment for altitude because all they need to do is suck harder to build the same level of oxygen in the chamber as a lower spin would develop at sea level.

Drewd · **Joined:** Mon Feb 06, 2006 12:24 pm **Posts:** 902

geordi wrote:

mass-hole wrote:

I can't believe that wouldn't be true of all diesels at altitude. It's not like they put 20% overhead in the tuning for altitude. They def didn't on these liberties and I cannot seeing them leave that much on the table in a competitive truck market like the power stroke where every ft-lb counts. You get to altitude and you've gotta dial back the boost so it's gonna burn richer and clog up the dpf.

AFAIK, boosted engines don't need any adjustment for altitude because all they need to do is suck harder to build the same level of oxygen in the chamber as a lower spin would develop at sea level.

Problem is that it takes noticeably longer for that boost to occur and during that time the engine is not getting enough air and is pushing out more soot. The soot loading that occurs in stop/go city driving while towing a 5th wheel is disgusting. My 07 WK CRD has a DPF and in 100k miles it has never given us a problem. My 05 F350 is up to 9k miles and 6k of that was towing this summer and I hate this rig. I lost a day of vacation because the DPF got so clogged that the only way to clean it was to disconnect my camper and drive it for an hour. It would not regn/clean the DPF when towing up Woodland Park from Colorado Springs. When towing, it doesn't do passive regeneration despite exhaust temps being 700 to 800 deg F unless I'm driving 64 and slower.

Plan is to save up $2k and delete all of the emissions. No more DPF issues, no more DEF fluid worries, no more SCR, no more EGR, no more hot exhaust temps due to back pressure and burning 2.5 gallons of fuel to do a DPF regeneration every 97 to 230 miles. Last regen cycle only lasted 123 miles which is unacceptable. Best to date was 230 and that was not towing anything on a work commute to/from Denver.

geordi · **Posted:** Tue Sep 13, 2016 11:54 pm

Good lord, 2.5 gallons of fuel pissed out the tail each time is supposed to be "cleaner" than just not wasting the fuel in the first place??? Who in the actual F thought that up at the EPA and managed to convince others of it?

That is like announcing that they are going to force everyone to only bathe and drink DRY water, because normal water is too wet, but if you use three times as much, then it is suddenly dry water!

mass-hole · **Posted:** Wed Sep 14, 2016 5:49 pm

geordi wrote:

mass-hole wrote:

I can't believe that wouldn't be true of all diesels at altitude. It's not like they put 20% overhead in the tuning for altitude. They def didn't on these liberties and I cannot seeing them leave that much on the table in a competitive truck market like the power stroke where every ft-lb counts. You get to altitude and you've gotta dial back the boost so it's gonna burn richer and clog up the dpf.

AFAIK, boosted engines don't need any adjustment for altitude because all they need to do is suck harder to build the same level of oxygen in the chamber as a lower spin would develop at sea level.

Yeah, but you can only spin a turbo so fast. If the turbos already being worked at or near the limits of the what the engineers allow then they have to reduce boost as altitude increases. Turbo's dont care about the boost itself, they care about the pressure ratio from the inlet to the outlet of the compressor. Say a turbo can only make a 3:1 pressure ratio without overspinning, if you are at sea level then a 3:1 pressure ratio nets you ~29psi of boost. If you drive up to 10000' where the air pressure is 70% of sealevel, then your 3:1 pressure ratio is now only producing 16psi of boost but the turbo is spinning just as fast. Intake pressure is reduced 30%.

The OEM's can either leave a lot of overhead at sea level to keep the performance the same at altitude, or get as much power as possible at sea level and dial it back at altitude. Either way the high altitude performance is the same. My guess is that Ford(and RAM/GM) is doing the later in order to claim the the huge power numbers they do with their diesels but, in an attempt to maintain power, they try to keep the fueling the same while the turbo pressure is reduced. The negative side effect is that the AFR's are richer which increases soot loading in the DPF.

I am almost positive this the reverse technique of how GDE gets longer regen intervals on the EcoDiesel's. Eliminate the EGR, run MORE boost, and increase your AFR's so that you get a cleaner burn and less soot clogging the DPF.

Ultimately, it wouldnt matter if modern diesels didnt have DPF. Our jeeps will cut boost and dump a little more soot out the tail pipe and no one is the wiser, but the new motors with the filters have to do something with the extra soot since its not just flowing out the tail pipe anymore.

I keep saying it, but GTDI motors are where its at now. Diesel's are losing all the advantages they had. Sure you can delete all the emissions stuff but can you get away with it at this point? I've talked to a few people here in Utah that were fined for DPF deletes on their Cummins and Utah doesnt even have emissions testing!

mass-hole · **Posted:** Wed Sep 14, 2016 6:04 pm

Drewd wrote:

geordi wrote:

mass-hole wrote:

I can't believe that wouldn't be true of all diesels at altitude. It's not like they put 20% overhead in the tuning for altitude. They def didn't on these liberties and I cannot seeing them leave that much on the table in a competitive truck market like the power stroke where every ft-lb counts. You get to altitude and you've gotta dial back the boost so it's gonna burn richer and clog up the dpf.

AFAIK, boosted engines don't need any adjustment for altitude because all they need to do is suck harder to build the same level of oxygen in the chamber as a lower spin would develop at sea level.

Problem is that it takes noticeably longer for that boost to occur and during that time the engine is not getting enough air and is pushing out more soot. The soot loading that occurs in stop/go city driving while towing a 5th wheel is disgusting. My 07 WK CRD has a DPF and in 100k miles it has never given us a problem. My 05 F350 is up to 9k miles and 6k of that was towing this summer and I hate this rig. I lost a day of vacation because the DPF got so clogged that the only way to clean it was to disconnect my camper and drive it for an hour. It would not regn/clean the DPF when towing up Woodland Park from Colorado Springs. When towing, it doesn't do passive regeneration despite exhaust temps being 700 to 800 deg F unless I'm driving 64 and slower.

Plan is to save up $2k and delete all of the emissions. No more DPF issues, no more DEF fluid worries, no more SCR, no more EGR, no more hot exhaust temps due to back pressure and burning 2.5 gallons of fuel to do a DPF regeneration every 97 to 230 miles. Last regen cycle only lasted 123 miles which is unacceptable. Best to date was 230 and that was not towing anything on a work commute to/from Denver.

So it sounds like ford was pushing the performance limits and it backfired with ridiculous regen cycles at altitude. Sounds like you need a bigger turbo

Drewd · **Joined:** Mon Feb 06, 2006 12:24 pm **Posts:** 902

Yeah, Ford screwed things up with in the emission system with the 2nd gen 6.7L in order to get from 400 HP/800 lb-ft torque to 440 HP/860 lb-ft torque. They did put a bigger turbo in but it lags more and that lag is what is also building soot especially at altitude.

I'm towing my camper down to San Antonio next month and it'll be nice not have to worry about my DPF getting clogged at sea level towing.

Interesting note: My 2.0L gasoline direct injection engine emits more soot out the exhaust then my 6.7L diesel with its filtered exhaust. DI gas engines are sooty engines and the soot produced is finer and supposedly more hazardous then diesel soot. Particulate filters will probably be forced on gasoline direct injection engines in the near future. The EPA is too stupid to yet recognize the sootiness of GDI engines. http://articles.sae.org/13624/ The soot on my previous F150 with the ecoboob engine was pretty nasty and my Hyundai is almost as bad.

thermorex · **Posted:** Thu Sep 15, 2016 12:05 am

mass-hole wrote:

geordi wrote:

mass-hole wrote:

I can't believe that wouldn't be true of all diesels at altitude. It's not like they put 20% overhead in the tuning for altitude. They def didn't on these liberties and I cannot seeing them leave that much on the table in a competitive truck market like the power stroke where every ft-lb counts. You get to altitude and you've gotta dial back the boost so it's gonna burn richer and clog up the dpf.

AFAIK, boosted engines don't need any adjustment for altitude because all they need to do is suck harder to build the same level of oxygen in the chamber as a lower spin would develop at sea level.

Yeah, but you can only spin a turbo so fast. If the turbos already being worked at or near the limits of the what the engineers allow then they have to reduce boost as altitude increases. Turbo's dont care about the boost itself, they care about the pressure ratio from the inlet to the outlet of the compressor. Say a turbo can only make a 3:1 pressure ratio without overspinning, if you are at sea level then a 3:1 pressure ratio nets you ~29psi of boost. If you drive up to 10000' where the air pressure is 70% of sealevel, then your 3:1 pressure ratio is now only producing 16psi of boost but the turbo is spinning just as fast. Intake pressure is reduced 30%.

The OEM's can either leave a lot of overhead at sea level to keep the performance the same at altitude, or get as much power as possible at sea level and dial it back at altitude. Either way the high altitude performance is the same. My guess is that Ford(and RAM/GM) is doing the later in order to claim the the huge power numbers they do with their diesels but, in an attempt to maintain power, they try to keep the fueling the same while the turbo pressure is reduced. The negative side effect is that the AFR's are richer which increases soot loading in the DPF.

I am almost positive this the reverse technique of how GDE gets longer regen intervals on the EcoDiesel's. Eliminate the EGR, run MORE boost, and increase your AFR's so that you get a cleaner burn and less soot clogging the DPF.

Ultimately, it wouldnt matter if modern diesels didnt have DPF. Our jeeps will cut boost and dump a little more soot out the tail pipe and no one is the wiser, but the new motors with the filters have to do something with the extra soot since its not just flowing out the tail pipe anymore.

I keep saying it, but GTDI motors are where its at now. Diesel's are losing all the advantages they had. Sure you can delete all the emissions stuff but can you get away with it at this point? I've talked to a few people here in Utah that were fined for DPF deletes on their Cummins and Utah doesnt even have emissions testing!

The mistake for the fined folks was that they should have made a muffler that copies the dpf/scr combo and put the sensors in also, to look as close as stock. I doubt they would have gotten any fine, who would test for nox in the middle of the road?

WWDiesel · **Posted:** Thu Sep 15, 2016 11:36 am

mass-hole wrote:

. Sure you can delete all the emissions stuff but can you get away with it at this point? I've talked to a few people here in Utah that were fined for DPF deletes on their Cummins and Utah doesnt even have emissions testing!

How in the heck did they know they had DPF delete if they have no required inspections unless the owners were way overfueling and dumping a bunch of black smoke which certainly draws a lot of unwanted attention (stupid)? :roll:

This is a good article on DPF delete and the EPA! :shock:

Prod a bear(EPA) with a stick long enough and it’ll come after the antagonizer with a vengeance!!!
DPF Deletes: Crossing the Fine Line
http://www.hardworkingtrucks.com/special-report-dpf-deletes/

After reading this article, doubt very seriously that I would ever purchase one of the newer diesel trucks with all that stupid crap on them that now you cannot even remove!!! EPA forcing owners to drink the Koolaid!!! :furious:

mass-hole · **Posted:** Thu Sep 15, 2016 12:07 pm

WWDiesel wrote:

mass-hole wrote:

. Sure you can delete all the emissions stuff but can you get away with it at this point? I've talked to a few people here in Utah that were fined for DPF deletes on their Cummins and Utah doesnt even have emissions testing!

How in the heck did they know they had DPF delete if they have no required inspections unless the owners were way overfueling and dumping a bunch of black smoke which certainly draws a lot of unwanted attention (stupid)? :roll:

This is a good article on DPF delete and the EPA! :shock:

Prod a bear(EPA) with a stick long enough and it’ll come after the antagonizer with a vengeance!!!
DPF Deletes: Crossing the Fine Line
http://www.hardworkingtrucks.com/special-report-dpf-deletes/

After reading this article, doubt very seriously that I would ever purchase one of the newer diesel trucks with all that stupid crap on them that now you cannot even remove!!! EPA forcing owners to drink the Koolaid!!!

This. Although in the 3/4-1 ton market the gap between the gas and diesel motors is still pretty massive but I dont think you need 440hp and 925 ft-lbs to tow a 13,000 lbs trailer. The half ton gas motors make more power than the 3/4 & 1 ton gasser. If I really needed a 3/4 ton payload capacity then i would probably go order an HD Payload F150 with an ecoboost before I went and bought a F250 diesel. Save some serious coin and not deal with the headaches.

crasher · **Posted:** Thu Sep 15, 2016 1:14 pm

WWDiesel wrote:

mass-hole wrote:

. Sure you can delete all the emissions stuff but can you get away with it at this point? I've talked to a few people here in Utah that were fined for DPF deletes on their Cummins and Utah doesnt even have emissions testing!

How in the heck did they know they had DPF delete if they have no required inspections unless the owners were way overfueling and dumping a bunch of black smoke which certainly draws a lot of unwanted attention (stupid)?

This is a good article on DPF delete and the EPA! :shock:

Prod a bear(EPA) with a stick long enough and it’ll come after the antagonizer with a vengeance!!!
DPF Deletes: Crossing the Fine Line
http://www.hardworkingtrucks.com/special-report-dpf-deletes/

After reading this article, doubt very seriously that I would ever purchase one of the newer diesel trucks with all that stupid crap on them that now you cannot even remove!!! EPA forcing owners to drink the Koolaid!!! :furious:

Rolling coal?
I thought it was stupid when I owned a Ram and was a member at TDR, and I still fail to understand why boneheads do it to draw negative attention.
It always seemed to be the equivalent of getting liquored up and standing in an intersection shooting a pistol in the air.

jrsavoie · **Posted:** Thu Sep 15, 2016 2:10 pm

geordi wrote:

Good lord, 2.5 gallons of fuel pissed out the tail each time is supposed to be "cleaner" than just not wasting the fuel in the first place??? Who in the actual F thought that up at the EPA and managed to convince others of it?

That is like announcing that they are going to force everyone to only bathe and drink DRY water, because normal water is too wet, but if you use three times as much, then it is suddenly dry water!

Not to mention all the other associated costs associated with the emissions systems and the fuel that is used because of repairs.

Fuel to create replacement parts, fuel to ship the parts, fuel to pick up the parts. Everybody I know with DEF has had some sort of issue. Some certain issues probably caused more pollution in one instance, than the system was made to prevent in it's lifetime

I tapped out!

Who is online