2014 Diesel Grand Cherokee - JeepForum.com

 
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #1 of 14 Old 02-24-2013, 03:24 PM Thread Starter
gtg413i
Registered User
2003 WJ 
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Bay Area
Posts: 1,496
2014 Diesel Grand Cherokee

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...t-drive-review. Why didn't they make this in a v8?


Brian's Black Betty Build:
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
gtg413i is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 14 Old 02-24-2013, 03:29 PM
WJHahn
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Lake Elsinore
Posts: 149
Probably because...

"The grunt is enough to imbue the diesel Grand Cherokee with the same towing capacities—7400 pounds with rear-wheel drive, 7200 with four-wheel drive—as the 5.7-liter V-8 model. Of perhaps equal importance, of course, are fuel-economy ratings. Jeep pegs the rear-drive EcoDiesel at 22 mpg city/30 highway; opting for four driven wheels sacrifices 1 mpg in the city and 2 on the highway. Range is said to be more than 730 miles"...
WJHahn is offline  
post #3 of 14 Old 02-24-2013, 03:35 PM Thread Starter
gtg413i
Registered User
2003 WJ 
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Bay Area
Posts: 1,496
Quote:
Originally Posted by WJHahn
Probably because...

"The grunt is enough to imbue the diesel Grand Cherokee with the same towing capacities—7400 pounds with rear-wheel drive, 7200 with four-wheel drive—as the 5.7-liter V-8 model. Of perhaps equal importance, of course, are fuel-economy ratings. Jeep pegs the rear-drive EcoDiesel at 22 mpg city/30 highway; opting for four driven wheels sacrifices 1 mpg in the city and 2 on the highway. Range is said to be more than 730 miles"...
I can understand, the same with less, but why not more with the same? Guess thelarger market is the v6 and if that is successful, a v8 can come later.

Brian's Black Betty Build:
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
gtg413i is offline  
post #4 of 14 Old 02-24-2013, 03:48 PM
rcwj04
Registered User
2004 WJ 
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Flemington
Posts: 836
I really see no need for a v8 diesel in a grand, people who want that much power are going to get a truck, and the v6 is putting out like 450ish foot pounds of torque


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.




Quote:
You forget that most members here don't own a crystal ball to tell you exactly what your problem is, specially with bad pictures that don't say/show much of anything... -Jacko84

Just a 19 year old kid with a Jeep, and broke because of it, and loving every moment.
---------------------------------------------------------------
2004 WJ Laredo 4.0 116k
2" BDS coils & Bilstein 5100's | Addco rear swaybar with energy bushings |
K&N FIPK | glasspack | plasti-dipped badges | 17" moabs | HID's, 245/65/17 Cooper Discover AT3 | Rola rack | Fawkes stand alone shackle tabs | Bed lined interior (what a pain that was)
rcwj04 is offline  
post #5 of 14 Old 02-24-2013, 05:19 PM
Darnice
Registered User
2004 WJ 
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Windsor
Posts: 895
I was beside one (with mfg plates) and i talked to the driver, she said it had plenty of get up and go, more than the old mercedes 3 L diesel.
One think i did notice, its not a quiet one, it was clackety clackety, just like a truck.
Darnice is offline  
post #6 of 14 Old 02-24-2013, 06:59 PM
damessor92
Registered User
2000 WJ 
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: milton
Posts: 135
whatre they thinking on a price tag for it and who makes the diesel?
damessor92 is offline  
post #7 of 14 Old 04-01-2013, 10:53 PM
DareBrandon
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 2
Cummins....
DareBrandon is offline  
post #8 of 14 Old 04-01-2013, 10:55 PM
DareBrandon
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 2
No need for a v8 it will probably be a straight 6. My guess...
DareBrandon is offline  
post #9 of 14 Old 04-01-2013, 11:17 PM
PhantomWJ
Registered User
2003 WJ 
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: IE
Posts: 3,802
They look uglier and uglier.
PhantomWJ is offline  
post #10 of 14 Old 04-03-2013, 11:25 PM
capcyclone
Member
 
capcyclone's Avatar
2002 WJ 
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 242
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhantomWJ View Post
They look uglier and uglier.
^^I agree.

The GC historically was so easy to recognize on the road - it stood out (in a good way) - you knew exactly what it was. The new GCs look a lot like other midsize SUVs/crossovers - Acura MDX, Ford Explorer, etc.

I hope Jeep doesn't change the looks of the Wrangler.....that would be sacrilege.

"The Jeep is America's only real sports car" - Enzo Ferrari

'98 Jeep GC 5.2L "ZJ" - Sold
'02 Jeep GC 4.7L HO "WJ" - Daily driver
capcyclone is offline  
post #11 of 14 Old 04-04-2013, 03:01 PM
NDSU_Bison
Registered User
2014 WK 
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Fargo
Posts: 726
I have a 2008 CRD and my informal seat-of-the-pants dynomometer when test driving the hemi and CRD told me the CRD has better get up and go. The Hemi may do better once you are past 60 MPH, but I rarely drive that fast.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Darnice View Post
I was beside one (with mfg plates) and i talked to the driver, she said it had plenty of get up and go, more than the old mercedes 3 L diesel.
One think i did notice, its not a quiet one, it was clackety clackety, just like a truck.
NDSU_Bison is offline  
post #12 of 14 Old 04-05-2013, 09:26 AM
Radcrd
Registered User
2007 WK 
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Montreal
Posts: 371
Quote:
Originally Posted by DareBrandon View Post
Cummins....
Nope, it a VM Motori Italian engine.

2007 WK CRD QDII, GDE HOT tune. 275/55/18'' on Sahara's, SRT8 suspension.
2000 Jetta TDI (hers)
2006 Liberty CRD (sold)
3 VW TDI's (sold)
Radcrd is offline  
post #13 of 14 Old 04-06-2013, 11:58 PM
Mcjeeperson
Registered User
1988 YJ Wrangler 
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 84
http://www.dieselpowermag.com/tech/1...diesel_engine/

Here's a version Banks engineering is working on. Am I the only one totally stoked about this engine? It's kind of an engineering marvel.
Mcjeeperson is offline  
post #14 of 14 Old 04-07-2013, 10:34 AM Thread Starter
gtg413i
Registered User
2003 WJ 
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Bay Area
Posts: 1,496
“Our initial build will be 240 hp and close to 500 lb ft with an engine weight under 500 pounds,” reports Banks.

That excites me, but I have a feeling these engines will garner more excitement for the wrangler rubicon crowd.

Brian's Black Betty Build:
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
gtg413i is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the JeepForum.com forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid e-mail address for yourself.



Email Address:
OR

Log-in









Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.




Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome