Please God....tell me that these EPA mpg posted on www.kbb.com (check link below) over the '07 Jeep Wrangler 4 door are real. It states that the epa mileage for the 4 door unlimited X m/t 2wd is 19city/27hwy. This is for the 3.8 liter V6 - which i think is being shared with the 2 door version (one that i'm buying). Can anyone verify this?
Silver Metallic finish with black dual tops - Dana 44 Rear 2.25" Suspension Lift with Old Man Emu Shocks Performance Accessories 1" Body Lift Daystar 1" Motor Mount Lift Spidertrax 1.25" Wheel Spacers - 32"x11.5" MT/R Tires
Yup- With those numbers and the current trend in gas prices dealers will be offering incentives/ cash back - you name it. If you are seriously thinking about buying one of these I would wait about 6 months- I know there be some crazy deals soon. 16/19!?! LOL
I have been keeping MPG results of every fill up for about 18 months. Best has been 19.46MPG (pure highway) and worst has been 13.92 MPG (wheeling- lots of idling) Bone stock 03 auto (4sp) I6, 3.73's. But more typically I fall into 17MPG category.
Anyway, as you can tell from my previous post I am not impressed with those #'s - I hope that they have not been photoshopped from an 06 model.
If these numbers are true then either Jeep has made a terrible mistake or is clever. I know this hard to swallow but the majority of Wrangler buyers are not hard core off roaders. Not surprisingly, 07 model is beginning to reflect this trend with suburban DD additions (ESP, power windows, 2WD). But then Jeep puts mini van engine in it with 16/19 MPG, considering gas $3.50. This will immediately turn the 3/4 of target buyers away. It doesn't make sense.
OTH, Jeep maybe clever - They needed to get the new model out in 07 but a fuel efficient engine was not available (God forbid them using the flagship 3.0 MB bluetec diesel in a "lower class" wrangler). So maybe this engine is just a hold-over until a diesel engine becomes available for next year.
I'm honestly trying to like the 07 but it seems that pleasing all of the planned 07 target audience is a bit over zealous and thus attempting to compromise with off-roaders and suburban DD is ending up pleasing few. I'm giving Jeep the benefit of the doubt and believe that they and being clever and have a fuel efficient diesel planned on the Liberty's now discontinued CRD as an option and DC's "world engine" variant as a standard base. At least I hope- otherwise Jeep is in trouble as CAFE standards in the next couple years will kill them as a company.
1) It seems to me that Jeep made a good choice with the 3.8. It is more fuel efficient than the 4.0, relatively cheap, reliable (and tested from service in the minivans), and appears to have good low-midrange power charcteristics. I would also love to see a diesel in the JK (and would not be surprised to see that or a V8 as an option for the Unlimited in a year or two), but I think the 3.8 is a better choice (considering cost) than any other gas engine that Jeep currently offers.
2) I agree that I was extremely excited about the 18/25 numbers, but I knew that they were not EPA numbers, but manufacturer estimates, which commonly differ from the EPA numbers. That said, the difference between the manufacturer numbers and the EPA numbers is fairly large (although we still don't have rock solid confirmation of the EPA numbers) and I am curious how Jeep missed the mark so badly or if maybe they did so on purpose.
3) Whether DC padded the fleet estimates or not, 16 city, 19 hwy for a JK Rubi Unlimited automatic are good numbers and are better than the 06 Unlimited Rubi automatic (14/18). The frustrating thing to me in reading a lot of the negative posts is that if Jeep really wanted to get an extra 3-6 mpg with the 3.8 they could have improved the aerodynamics further (no fender gaps, spare under vehicle, dropped various underbody components to improve airflow under the vehicle, dropped the vehicle to minimize underbody airflow, smaller mirrors, etc.) or they could have made the drivetrain more efficient (smaller, more efficient axles; 5 spd. auto). With the possible exception of a 5 spd auto (which probably was not added for cost reasons - I could also see that being added later, possibly in combo with a new engine option) Jeep did not make these changes because they wanted to increase the trail-worthiness of the Jeep as a first priority with increased fuel economy as a lower priority. We should be praising Jeep for keeping the Wrangler styling cues intact and making the drivetrain more robust for off-road conditions (which is what everyone on the forums was asking Jeep to do, by the way) instead of designing the JK for maximum fuel economy.
4) I have never seen more testimonials about what great mileage TJs get than in the last few days. A lot of people are commenting that they get better mileage than 16/19 in their TJ. That is entirely plausible if you drive extremely slow or if you own something other than a LJ automatic. If you own a manual or a short wheelbase TJ, you will get better mpg. The only window stickers we have seen are for JK Unlimiteds with automatics - all other JKs should get slightly better mpg which will be slightly better than the comparable TJ model. The JK Unlimited auto is a foot longer and 600 lbs. heavier than a LJ auto and it still gets 2 mpg. better in the city and 1 mpg. better on the hwy. The JK short wheelbase auto is almost the same size and only 300 lbs. heavier than the TJ short wheelbase auto. Thus, I would expect the JK short wheelbase to get 2-3 mpg. greater mileage than a comparatively equipped short wheelbase TJ.
well all i gotta say is this thing screams for a diesel.
and the dealers WILL scream for something and offer their virgin daughters along with a deal on these jeeps if the MPG of at least the 2 door straight shift rubi gets a decent 23 .. 25 mpg on the highway... this is after the first blush wears off.. say in 6 months or therabouts...
just wait, the war drums are beating like mad about iran.. gas is gonna more expensive before it gets cheaper...
I have found that the TJ speedo/odo is rather generous in its readings with stock tires. Mine is pretty accurate with 32" tires. I measured my commute of 38 miles each way using the calibrated speedo in my BMW and compared it to the Jeep. Radar signs also confirm this. This means that most peoples mpg readings are overinflated. The most I have ever seen from my Jeep is 16-17 on the highway. This is with 32-11.50 MT MTX tires very slightly over inflated for the road.
I'd love to see a diesel in the JK. If, in a few years, they still haven't introduced one I may just convert the TJ with a suitable diesel.