Jeep Wrangler Forum banner

Diesel and Hybrid confirmed for next Generation Wrangler / JL

9K views 75 replies 13 participants last post by  freeskier 
#1 ·
From the Business plan released in today's Analysts call;

"FCA said it will add diesel and hybrid electric versions of its next-generation Jeep Wrangler when it goes on sale by 2018."

FCA to build more Jeeps, Rams under new production plan

The Hybrid seems to be the "Mild Hybrid 48V (2018)" alluded to in page 15 of the presentation.



Unsure about the "New Global small and medium engine architecture (2016)" mentioned on the same page whether that is just another variant of the TigerShark and Pentastar but with things like EGR & DI, or if it is directed to the diesel side at all (as the 2.8 CRD is no longer Euro compliant and isn't NAFTA region compliant).
 
See less See more
1
#2 ·
On Page 17 you can see their targets for the 4dr Wrangler and Ram for 2018.
But also the 4dr Wrangler Next Gen Powertrain, then further down the Next Gen Wrangler Diesel between the 2018/2022 target and then the Next Gen Wrangler HEV (Hybrid Electric Vehicle) beyond the 2022 target.



I am a bit concerned that also on that page they mention axle disconnect and electronic steering without specific platform, just more as a strategy for the category.

I know they recently announced the revamp for the GrandCherokee, but that would be a change many of us hadn't anticipated and will definitely change the performance and handling characteristics of the Wrangler in a negative way IMO. :confused:
 
#3 ·
As somebody whose daily commute is 70 gas guzzling miles, I'm intrigued to hear more about the hybrid. I reckon it'll come with a premium cost that'll negate gas savings, though.
 
#4 ·
Yeah, most likely.

It'd be interesting to see what they are focusing on for its application, because it sounds like a small battery & low-power burst type HEV which might get just a few miles on electric, and that it would primarily just smooth out start/stop city driving and accelerating/decelerating or hill climbing/descending type stuff.

Of course electric drives can be torquey, it just depends on size. If it's just a small system as the "Mild Hybrid" category/title implies, then it might not be that huge boost to torque we would hope for on the trails, just a little ~50HP nudge to smooth things out.

But at this point who knows, it could be what we hope for an become something we wish we had long ago. :D
 
#5 ·
Here are my thoughts for the new roadmap...

- Will the 2 Door Jeep be updated alongside with the Unlimited 4-Door? Will the new powertrains will be able to be packaged effectively like diesel exhaust systems and hybrid batteries with the 2 door without compromising off road performance?

- Diesel & Hybrid Powertrains means 8+ Speed Automatic Transmission Only. Manual Transmission will most likely be discontinued in favor for more fuel economy.

- Will the hybrid powertrain somehow affect modding, especially performance?
 
#7 ·
I suspect the Diesel exhaust wouldn't be an issue, there are similar and smaller platforms using similar diesels already, it may just be a question of what is put at risk of exposure in the under-belly since it has a predictable path to follow regarding placement, while the batteries are a little more flexible in location.

Although not a Micro Hybrid, being a mild hybrid, the battery would likely be something much smaller than systems people are more familiar with in vehicles like the Escape, but not as small as that targeted for the Ford Ka.

So while it likely couldn't fit in the space currently occupied by the subwoofer, it probably could fit in a space similar to the back cargo area at a depth of a few inches. My concern is the technology they use Lithium Titinate vs Lithium Iron (cost vs Performance vs weight vs longevity)

I'm sure a 'mild' Hybrid primarily used for smoothing out variable city driving and acceleration/hills/etc. of the un-aerodynamic Wrangler beyond the 'start/stop efforts' could be a rather small battery and not impact the 2dr's dynamics too much based on weight distribution etc alone. It's too bad it looks like they would be .

Also if they were forward thinking enough, and placed the dense battery module low in the vehicle it might actually improve on-road handling by lowering the centre of gravity, which might also help in some off-road situations. Remember that FCA will also be looking to reduce weight in the Wrangler platform in general, so it won't be the giant cumbersome batteries of yester-year it would be a newer lighter Lithium option rather than LeadCarbon.

- Diesel & Hybrid Powertrains means 8+ Speed Automatic Transmission Only. Manual Transmission will most likely be discontinued in favor for more fuel economy.
Hybrid likely means Automatic, doesn't necessitate an auto as there are manual transmission Hybrids out there already, and the diesel already uses manual, so there's no reason why a 3.0L or 2.0L VM option would require that change.

- Will the hybrid powertrain somehow affect modding, especially performance?
It most likely would affect modding, and performance, but that's no different than the 3.8 vs 3.6L vs 2.8L currently. The main question is the range of limitations. I have a feeling that the Hybrid system would likely both take longer and have much greater limitations on what is possible or economically feasible for 3rd parties and individuals.
 
#6 ·
My biggest concern with a hybrid would be the complexity. There is a LOT of extra stuff involved and that means more stuff that can go wrong. For that reason only, I prefer the diesel idea.

Otherwise, a hybrid sounds great to me. Think about it, hybrids typically get great city mpg because of all the low-speed driving. Shouldn't a hybrid also get really good gas mileage driving off-road, for similar reasons?
 
#8 ·
Agreed, Hybrid is definitely more complex, even just the fact that it's now two engines/machines not just one. However they are learning more each day so hopefully by 2020 when it's a reality it'll be a little more reliable and 'durable'.

The issue with Off-road use of the hybrid is that there is likely not as much of the mid-RPM coasting to regenerate batteries and get you the efficient regenerative process as in city driving it would ping-pong between max and min RPM more. It's a lot of burst driving that also wouldn't necessarily benefit a Hybrid as much (a pure electric might benefit more actually) and you may find that it doesn't charge the batteries quick enough.

However, those burst would benefit from the quick electric delivery of torque for sure, but not sure they would provide the best efficiency overall throughout the trail. It would be interesting to look at the recent Hybrid Land Rover's numbers in that same scenario.
 
#10 ·
Not sure why you guys are saying hybrids are much more complex. Besides adding coils around the bellhousing, using a different flywheel, another battery and a few more wires, it's not that much of a change. Hybrids usually no longer have an alternator or mechanical starter (some still have one as a backup), and the electric motor requires no maintenance, so when you factor these in it's almost a trade off for complexity. The hybrid batteries usually have a 10 year 150,000 mile warranty as well.
 
#11 ·
Not sure why you guys are saying hybrids are much more complex. Besides adding coils around the bellhousing, using a different flywheel, another battery and a few more wires, it's not that much of a change.
I don't think either of us were thinking that it involved alchemy, however there is the simple fact that X+1 is +1 more complex than X, so it is more complex.

Add that it is a fuel engine plus an electric machine and the separate components of each, plus the electronics that control them, they are more complex. And similarly calling a series of dozens of cells as just "another battery" is a little over-simplification too.

Hybrids usually no longer have an alternator or mechanical starter (some still have one as a backup), and the electric motor requires no maintenance, so when you factor these in it's almost a trade off for complexity. The hybrid batteries usually have a 10 year 150,000 mile warranty as well.
Yeah it's far from a wash, the extra cells vs Alternator may be a wash, but there is still a fair number of additional parts. They don't necessarily relate to reliability as the added complexity is like one of our previous manual vs automatic discussions, which isn't predictive of reliability as some transmissions are notoriously unreliable despite their simplicity / complexity.

As our company only offers Hybrids as company cars (you get a car allowance if you want something else) I've been able to experience the myriad of "no problems" from my colleagues. Yes they have improved, especially vs the early ones like the Ford Escape, but they are still not anywhere near what I would call robust, especially when subjected to the environments that many of us put them through off-road. The Wrangler's use-case is not the typical Hybrid activity as mentioned above.

Plus if there were truly nothing to it, they would be lifetime warranties (like the battery on my colleague's new Sonata), not X years/miles. So it's still a consideration, especially on a vehicle that has historically seen multiple owners and many years/miles in their lifetime.
 
#13 ·
I am not one to say that because I will never buy a hybrid Wrangler that no one should be able to buy one. That said, why is Jeep so focused on implementing this powertrain on a Wrangler? They would have better success (sales) implementing hybrid technology on their "soft" models (Renegade, Cherokee, etc.) since that is the market these vehicles are catered too anyway. In addition, hybrid technology on a Wrangler will not be as effective as hybrid technology on, say, a Cherokee in terms of boosting the average fuel economy of the fleet (if that is the intention).

One can only hope that these technologies are being implemented to justify a Hemi option :jawdrop:
 
#24 ·
Its the idea that they have to cater to people who would obviously be better suited to purchase a minivan/rav4 or one of those never ending crossover things! Just go buy your stinking crossover crap. We already have sahara's with painted fenders, and 4 doors with 18" wheels. How much more minivan do you people need?

:) Invest that R&D and money into something seriously useful for the wrangler branding. Aluminum body? Sounds great as long as the panels cost the same as steel. Small turbo diesel? heck yes!

Fiat 2.4l 4 cylinder multi air that has so little power they have to hybridize/bastardize it so it can make it over a small hill in 4wd? No thanks. People whine about gas mileage and eventually you will get your gas mileage.....and lose all the utility of the vehicle in the process :)

I love it. The more complicated and stupid they make the wrangler the better my "simple" stick shift little v6 will hold its value! Yee haw!
 
#29 ·
I've always been surprised that nobody (that I've seen) has put an electric drivetrain into a TJ. It just makes a lot of sense for an off road vehicle and it would be exciting to have a hybrid powertrain option from the factory.

For those worried about reliability, just because something is more complex doesn't mean it has to be less reliable. The bigger issue is cost vs. reliability.
 
#30 ·
For those worried about reliability, just because something is more complex doesn't mean it has to be less reliable.
Statistically speaking, yes it does. Take example 2 JLs with equivalent drivetrain, except one JL (which we will call JLH) also has hybrid drivetrain.

Everything that can go wrong with the JL can go wrong with the JLH. However, the JLH has additional components that also have the possibility of failure. That means that the probability that SOMETHING will go wrong on the JLH is HIGHER because it is more complex.
 
#35 ·
Hey look - I am not that old (40) and I can remember guys that HATED fuel injection. You see the same thing with every new technology. Turbos, direct injection, etc. I am sure there were guys back in the 50's that HATED hydraulic lifters.

In this case, Jeep really has no choice. They have to meet the CAFE standards and they are going to sell enough Wranglers that the Wrangler MUST get better fuel economy. I believe they have already confirmed a body on frame construction with solid axles. I mean, what more do you want? Not everyone is going to buy a diesel, a hybrid may very well make a lot of sense for a city dweller. They need to meet the demands of the marketplace, comply with government regulations, and figure out a way to do it without killing the capability of the Wrangler. It sounds to me like they are doing just that.

I really don't have any qualms with their design approach. I wish they could improve their overall quality, as I've had some issues with my heater that pissed me right off. But in terms of how they are addressing the challenges facing the next Gen wrangler, I have no complaints.
 
#37 ·
A YJ conversion to all electrical with a pretty good look at it, and you can get an idea of the other end of the complexity scale around the 4 minute mark.

He also speaks to that diminishing return from higher speeds at the 5:25 mark;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MMDoSLPUn80
 
#41 ·
So the question remains: why only apply hybrid technology to the Wrangler? Is it because only the Wrangler is sold internationally? Is it because the Wrangler is the only vehicle that can't meet international standards?

I realize you are Canadian (at least your profile says you live in Canada), but I do not agree with that the rest of the country follows California in terms of regulation. As an American, I can honestly say that California laws are so different from the rest of the states that many Americans consider it to be a completely separate country. Granted I am not as familiar when it comes to car regulations so I could be wrong, but I do know a few things.

First, we still have 50-state CARB compliance and 49-state non-CARB compliance. Second, California is the ONLY state that has a ZEV requirement. FCA recently unveiled the hybrid Pacifica to help with this, as California requires a certain percentage of vehicles sold in the state to meet the ZEV standard. Third, not all locales require emissions testing, but the entire state of California does.

In addition, if we ever get a president into office that has any sense, many of these impossible-to-meet regulations will disappear, but that is a completely different topic haha.
 
#50 ·
So the question remains: why only apply hybrid technology to the Wrangler? Is it because only the Wrangler is sold internationally? Is it because the Wrangler is the only vehicle that can't meet international standards?

I realize you are Canadian (at least your profile says you live in Canada), but I do not agree with that the rest of the country follows California in terms of regulation. As an American, I can honestly say that California laws are so different from the rest of the states that many Americans consider it to be a completely separate country. Granted I am not as familiar when it comes to car regulations so I could be wrong, but I do know a few things.
It's not being only applied to the Wrangler, it's part of a larger migration, but the focus of the presentation was on the Grand Cherokee, RAM and Wrangler platforms, and for our discussion the Wrangler.
Which doesn't mean that the Renegade and baby Cherokee don't get it first. However, remember that the Renegade, Cherokee and Grand Cherokee are ALL exported internationally. The Grand Cherokee used to be a Chinese darling, but suffered recent sales drop with their economic bump.

As for the California reference it is an auto industry thing, where the regulations of your largest market drives alot of the focus of you development and production. The fact that other states are already on-board with California's regulatory proposal simply continues to give weight to that known adage, since the ZEV Alliance comprise: California, Connecticut, Maryland, Massachusetts, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island and Vermont.

But most importantly is that more regions than just the US are moving in that direction, that China, Japan and Germany (a ZEV Alliance Member) are adopting such regulation, it means that the producing countries are also moving that direction and FCA needs to keep pace with them as do all producers.

In addition, if we ever get a president into office that has any sense, many of these impossible-to-meet regulations will disappear, but that is a completely different topic haha.
They are far from impossible to meet, you just have a very VERY lazy American Industrial complex that would rather do things cheaply now than be the leader in the technologies of tomorrow. People are worried about keeping a job in the coal mine rather than the solar / wind industry (which has other trade and Intellectual Property issues also).

It's ridiculous that people are so resistant to change and think we still need to be driving inefficient vehicles rather than making them efficient and practical. The CAFE standards should've been up'ed long ago and we should be well beyond where we are in Auto technology, but we let the industry drag its feet and push regulations back, including simple things like rear-view cameras.

I'm not overly pro/anti business/environment, I just want progress to be more along the lines of the Pentastar which offered more power AND efficiency, rather than the industry dragging its feet until radical stuff has to happen that kills vehicle models.
 
#45 ·
You got solid axles and a full frame, right? How does a hybrid decrease capability? I see the potential to decrease reliability, but that potential is there with any change - direct injection, 8 speed transmission, forced induction, diesel, etc.
 
#46 ·
I don't think hybrid necessarily decreases capability, and since it is an option it really doesn't matter because I don't have to buy it. That said, we know that even with hybrid technology, the Wrangler won't even come close to 54.5 average MPG, so eventually it will become a problem again.

So what happens next? Well, hopefully I am right and either A. CAFE regulations are reduced, or B. automakers simply increase the cost of their vehicles to cover the costs of CAFE.
 
#49 ·
Yeah I don't get too wrapped up into trying to see into the future. I mean we are talking about a long, long time before the post-JL Wrangler sees production. Perhaps by then things will be very different in ways that we can't even really predict right now.

Honestly, the only thing I would ask from FCA right now is to improve QUALITY. I am confident the JL will have all the capability I will need, I just wonder whether it will have problems.
 
#61 ·
Maybe Jeep is trying to produce a hybrid Wrangler for the sake of doing something forward thinking and creating a segment that no one else is in, within a segment thwt everyone else has or is abondoning. Essentially, the Jeep Wrangler would be the first serious off road capable hybrid out there, besides the fact that itll also be the ONLY serious off road hybrid convertable. Yes I know Land Rover has their diesel hybrids, but thats not really the same segment as the Wrangler and no ones going rock crawling in a new land rover. If Jeep can make an even better Wrangler while keeping its character but also slap new technology why not. Sticking with the same old stuff is boring, there is no drive, there is no excitement. Im sure the people at Jeep are excited about the future of Wrangler.
 
#70 ·
I can't wait for the 3.0L CRD JL. With owners reporting 30 MPGs highway in the real world with this engine in the Ram, there's no telling what it'll be capable of in a JL that's almost 1,500 lbs. lighter. This is going to be an awesome combo.
 
#74 ·
Diesel's a mighty expensive option. That's a lot of $$ that could go toward mods. No thanks. (I'd probably open up the purse strings for a Hemi, though, gas mileage be damned.)
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top