Chrysler Announces Introduction of Jeep Liberty 2.8L Common Rail in North Amereica

DaimlerChrysler AG's Chrysler Group will test market a diesel-powered Jeep Liberty vehicle in North America.

A Chrysler Group spokeswoman said the company will gauge market demand in the U.S. and Canada with 5,000 units in 2004.

In a press release Monday 11/25/2002, DaimlerChrysler said the vehicle will use a 2.8-liter common rail turbo-diesel engine.

The German automaker hasn't determined the vehicle's price.

DaimlerChrysler made the announcement at its Innovation Symposium in New York. Chrysler Group President and Chief Executive Diter Zetsche said the U.S. could curb its oil usage by 800 million gallons and reduce carbon dioxide emissions by 8 million tons a year if Americans bought diesel engines at the same rate Europeans do.

Zetsche noted the delay in acceptance of diesel fuel in passenger cars in North America, citing failed attempts to introduce diesel engines here in the 1980s. Currently, DaimlerChrysler offers diesel engines in its Dodge Ram heavy-duty trucks in North America. In Europe, where sales of diesel-fueled passenger vehicles are approaching those of gasoline-fueled vehicles, the cetane rating of diesel fuel is around 52, whereas in the U.S., the rating averages around 42. U.S. automakers are calling for refiners to improve diesel fuel by both reducing sulfur content, which if too high can incapacitate the aftertreatment technologies used to reduce harmful exhaust emissions, and increase the diesel fuels cetane rating helping to improve the vehicles performance.

Re: Chrysler Announces Introduction of Jeep Liberty 2.8L Common Rail in North Amereica

US Regulations and the Future of Diesel in Light Duty Application: Reg Modlin,
DaimlerChrysler - Diesel Powertrain Development

Reg Modlin notes with an anecdote about "The Perfect Storm," in which three storm systems came together to form a deadly super storm.

He said that in the world of diesel companies, fuel quality, fuel economy, and emission regulations constitute three elements coming together to make the perfect storm, and we shouldn't be steering policy right into the center of it.

Daimler Chrysler's view is that diesel has a place in the future motor vehicle fleet because it
is the best alternative for improved fuel economy and reduced CO2 emissions in the near- to mid-term. However, health-based regulations effectively bar diesel in the light duty segment, making a technology deemed necessary elsewhere in the world a nonviable option for the United States. He noted the apparent conflict between health-based emission restrictions and energy policies.

Reviewing the challenges, Modlin said that existing tailpipe regulations appear to allow some flexibility for light duty diesel -- but these phase out by 2007, which doesn't allow a sufficient time span to develop and market a vehicle cost effectively. In addition, the requisite ULSD fuel won't be ready by 2004. The proposed sulfur cap of 15 ppm is adequate to support after-treatment technologies. What this means is that new diesel engines are effectively choked out of the market by 2004 unless better fuel becomes available. He added that customers require improved cetane levels for better start up, reduced smoke and noise, and a smoother ride. US cetane levels are very low. (He also noted that the proposed regulations neglect to set limits on aromatics.)

In conclusion, he said that diesel offers the only option to significantly improve fuel economy in the near term, but the timing and stringency of emissions and fuel regulations are inconsistent and counterproductive. Fuel quality must improve beyond the current proposals.

Re: Chrysler Announces Introduction of Jeep Liberty 2.8L Common Rail in North Amereica

That's cool. Here's the link that ClevelandBiosiesel sent me:
http://biz.yahoo.com/rc/021125/autos_chrysler_1.html

Re: Chrysler Announces Introduction of Jeep Liberty 2.8L Common Rail in North Amereica

Here's another good one from the AP, Chrysler says all they need is some GOOD ULSD fuel to get going here!

BRING ON ULSD NOW!

http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/021125/daimler_diesel_2.html

Re: Chrysler Announces Introduction of Jeep Liberty 2.8L Common Rail in North Amereica

"The best way to show our commitment to work together is to bring a modern, clean diesel passenger vehicle to market," Zetsche said.

Still, there's a lot of work that needs to be done to get diesel fuel more energy efficient. The auto industry has been pressing oil refineries to distribute the same kind of high quality, low-sulfur diesel fuel to the United States as found in Europe.

Currently, diesel oil in the United States contains 330 parts per million of sulfur, more than six times the amount found in Europe, DaimlerChrysler executives said.

Diesel fuel in the United States does not currently meet federal standards on the limits of oxides of nitrogen emissions and other soot particles expected to be implemented in 2006.

About 35 percent of passenger cars in Europe have diesel engines, according to Ann Smith, a company spokeswoman. Zetsche said that the United States could reduce its oil use by approximately 800 million gallons and carbon dioxide emissions by eight million tons annually, if Americans purchased diesel-powered cars at the same rate as Europeans.

However, Zetsche acknowledged that diesel fuel still faces an image problem, citing failed efforts by auto companies to launch diesel-powered vehicles back in the 1980s that turned off consumers because they were smelly and loud.

"Decades of bad publicity have followed diesel for so long," Zetsche said.

Re: Chrysler Announces Introduction of Jeep Liberty 2.8L Common Rail in North Amereica

I read another article about this coming and it stated mileage as being 18 city and 29 highway. They seemed kind of low to me. I figured it would be in the mid 20's for the city and mid 30's for the highway if not better.

Good thing is now someone else is coming to the plate. Hopefully that will help get the ball rolling and get a few more diesels offered here and help get USLD here sooner.

Re: Chrysler Announces Introduction of Jeep Liberty 2.8L Common Rail in North Amereica

Engine:

Car/Truck/wanna be off roader:

Re: Chrysler Announces Introduction of Jeep Liberty 2.8L Common Rail in North Amereica

If they put it in the Wrangler, I'd buy one.

I have no use for a Liberty. They're not real Jeeps.

Oddly, they don't even put diesels in Wranglers in Europe. Or anywhere else, for that matter. Only the Liberty (known as the "Cherokee" overseas) and the Grand Cherokee.

Oh well. Nice try.

-mickey

Re: Chrysler Announces Introduction of Jeep Liberty 2.8L Common Rail in North Amereica

I read another article about this coming and it stated mileage as being 18 city and 29 highway. They seemed kind of low to me. I figured it would be in the mid 20's for the city and mid 30's for the highway if not better.

Click to expand...

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">The gasser V6 only gets about 20 on the highway. 29 is a HUGE improvement.

It's all relative. My 4.0 Wrangler only gets 18 on the highway...on a good day. If I put a diesel in it and raise that up to 25 I'll be turning handsprings and singing for joy.

-mickey

Re: Chrysler Announces Introduction of Jeep Liberty 2.8L Common Rail in North Amereica

That is true. I have a '96 Dakota and it gets 15mpg in town and 19 on the highway with the 5.2 and I got rid of a '01 dakota quad cab that got 15mpg in town until computer problems solved that. Compared to those numbers I would be jumping for joy but what really caught my eye was the 18mpg in town. With a V8 getting 15mpg in town I would think that the diesel would get better than 18mpg. At least on the low side of the twenties. The biggest surprise here is the in-town mileage is almost the same as the V6 and that might hurt sales. Alot of prople won't go the diesel route if they don't see an advantage.

Re: Chrysler Announces Introduction of Jeep Liberty 2.8L Common Rail in North Amereica

Yeah, that's kind of odd. 29 on the highway sounds right, but the urban number seems low. The Liberty isn't a tremendously heavy vehicle, and aerodynamics don't come into play in urban driving.

According to www.jeep.co.uk the 2.5 gets just over 20 mpg in "urban cycle." That's a smaller engine. I don't know how the European "urban cycle" test compares to the EPA test, though.

-mickey

Re: Chrysler Announces Introduction of Jeep Liberty 2.8L Common Rail in North Amereica

must be an automatic. Still, 18 seems low. I would have expected the low 20's.

Re: Chrysler Announces Introduction of Jeep Liberty 2.8L Common Rail in North Amereica

That MPG does sound low, but is a large improvement relative to the gas V6. (Why IS the Liberty so thirsty? I consistently get low to mid-20s MPG with my manual shift, 4.0 litre Cherokee on the highway. For that matter, I rather wish they would reintroduce the Cherokee with this engine!) Still, I have to give kudos to DaimlerChrysler for having the courage to do this in light of the large numbers of diesel skeptics in this country.

Re: Chrysler Announces Introduction of Jeep Liberty 2.8L Common Rail in North Amereica

Originally posted by spokeman:
(Why IS the Liberty so thirsty? I consistently get low to mid-20s MPG with my manual shift, 4.0 litre Cherokee on the highway.

Click to expand...

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Isn't the Liberty considerably heavier than the Cherokee? Also, is it possible that the fuel economy numbers given for the diesel Liberty are with automatic transmission?

Re: Chrysler Announces Introduction of Jeep Liberty 2.8L Common Rail in North Amereica

I believe the Liberty is about 400# heavier than the Cherokee. Lets see: heavier, taller, same ground clearance, less power, less gas mileage, less capable off-road.....no wonder it's a turd. Sorry, just another Cherokee owner glad I got one of the last ones. OK so it rides nice and has nicer interior.

I'd take a diesel Cherokee in a heartbeat. The liberty can rot diesel or no diesel. The entire small SUV segment blows my mind when there's hardly any left that are acutally UTILITY vehicles. Can't tow, can't off-road, same passenger space as a car, I just don't see it. At least the fullsize SUV's are still truck based for the most part and can be used accordingly.

Re: Chrysler Announces Introduction of Jeep Liberty 2.8L Common Rail in North Amereica

Here's the Washington Post article:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A38375-2002Nov25.html

Re: Chrysler Announces Introduction of Jeep Liberty 2.8L Common Rail in North Amereica

I'd consider buying one.

Re: Chrysler Announces Introduction of Jeep Liberty 2.8L Common Rail in North Amereica

Originally posted by highhilltdi:
........ At least the fullsize SUV's are still truck based for the most part ..

Click to expand...

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">And you see that as an advantage ?? Oh, and their so-called offroading ability is a joke ... precisely because they're truck-based, with evil handling characteristics and were never designed from scratch as offroad vehicles! The American SUV should have been strangled while still on the drawing board. Their production is a crime, but a highly profitable one for the US manufacturers preying on the gullibility of the consumer.

- Richard

Re: Chrysler Announces Introduction of Jeep Liberty 2.8L Common Rail in North Amereica

Actually when it comes to that type of vehicle i'm not into SUV's that much either. I prefer a 4-door pickup or at least an extended cab. In that realm Ford and Chevy are making the Ranger and S-10 (probably with a new name) mid-size like the current Dakota. They both have announced that will be offereing smaller diesel engines in those trucks either next year or the the year after due to consumer demand. I know when I had my Dakota Quad Cab i wished it had a diesel in it. Now dodge is talking about a small cummins when the redesgined Dakota comes out in another year.

Re: Chrysler Announces Introduction of Jeep Liberty 2.8L Common Rail in North Amereica

Originally posted by chopchop:
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by highhilltdi:
........ At least the fullsize SUV's are still truck based for the most part ..

Click to expand...

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">And you see that as an advantage ??

Oh, and their so-called offroading ability is a joke ... precisely because they're truck-based, with evil handling characteristics and were never designed from scratch as offroad vehicles!
- Richard</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">It's and advantage when I need something to tow 7,000# and haul the family. The full-size truck-based SUV's will do fine for typical use off-roading. Extreme off-roading is a hobby and very few daily drivers are really worthy of (although the Cherokee/Wrangler can work). When I need to get to my cabin after a storm, through a muddy/snowy field, or drive up some back roads in deep snow a truck based ute will work fine. Better than the SUV looking minivans that can't tow to save their life.

I haven't witnessed these "evil handling characteristics" on any of my trucks. I suppose if you're driving one like it's a sports car you can get in trouble quick, but I seem to be able to drive the speed limit anywhere I want. One of my biggest complaints so far with the Jetta is I can't drive as quickly on many of the back roads. It just doesn't handle the rough conditions as well and wants to drag a lot. But tit for tat, I'm getting 44mpg so i'll just drive slower for 10 miles of my commute.

Re: Chrysler Announces Introduction of Jeep Liberty 2.8L Common Rail in North Amereica

Romi: Get a TJ-series Wrangler. (Round headlights.) They're much better than the older ones, in every way.

Get a factory hardtop. If you buy one from a dealer after the fact, they're a whopping $4000, but they're only about a $900 option on the factory sticker. Aftermarket tops are a lot more, too. And the softtops are WAY too noisy on the highway. You can't even hear yourself think. Believe me, you'll have a hard top evenutally...so you might as well get one cheap.

Don't even think about a base model 4-cylinder one. Not only are they noisy and underpowered, but they have lighter axles. One of those might be a good place to start if you want to install a diesel engine, but the light duty axles are a deal breaker for me.

If you are buying a new one, and think you might want to "build it" in the future, consider spending a little extra for the Rubicon package. You get a Dana 44 front axle to match the one in the rear (thus saving you the trouble of axle upgrades later on), a lift, 31" tires (classic BRG MudTerrains, no less), an electric rear locker, and various other off-road goodies. It would cost you far more money to duplicate all that stuff in the aftermarket. The Rubicon package is a screaming bargain, and best of all you can get it separately from "luxury" add-ons. Daimler-Chrysler intended the Rubicon to be the most competent factory-stock offroader ever made, and they did an excellent job. I read a review in which they took a new Rubicon over the actual Rubicon Trail, along with a seriously "built" CJ-series support vehicle, and the CJ ended up being pulled out of a ditch by the Rubicon. Any stock vehicle that can survive the Rubicon Trail is a serious offroader! (The Defender 90 made it too...barely. It has open diffs, so they had to be very careful choosing their lines. And it's bigger and fatter than a Jeep, which doesn't help in narrow sections.)

Overall, I'm VERY impressed with my TJ Wrangler. It has 48,000 miles on it, and it's still the tightest, most squeak-free vehicle I've ever owned. They're simple, tough and well built. And thanks to the new coil spring suspension (front and rear), it's a breeze to "build" into a serious rock crawler. A simple lift kit and swaybar disconnects will give you a ramp travel index of over 1000. That's the point at which a 4x4 is considered to be a "serious" 4x4. Most vehicles, including previous Jeeps, require much more extensive (and expensive) modification to achieve that.

-mickey

[ November 27, 2002, 13:11: Message edited by: mickey ]

Re: Chrysler Announces Introduction of Jeep Liberty 2.8L Common Rail in North Amereica

Hey mickey, did you see the new wranglers have a better 4cyl? Gone is that ancient 2.5L. The new one may is a 2.4L but HP is up around 150 now which shouldn't be too bad. I used to run a pretty serious CJ.

Re: Chrysler Announces Introduction of Jeep Liberty 2.8L Common Rail in North Amereica

Mickey, not to make you or I drool more than I already am, but they do make wranglers with diesels somehwere. One of my customers just got back from a trip to south america, not sure exactly where, but he said he did a 4x4 offroading excursion. His first comment to me (not even knowing I like diesels) was, the wranglers had diesels, and they were great, LOTS of torque to climb rocks. I told him to stop I was getting a boner. I loved my '93 wrangler. The newer wranglers are more car like inside with the dash etc, but are nicer overall I agree.

I had a liberty for a week or so as a loaner when my car was in the shop. It wasn't that bad, and I think it rode better than the old style cherokee sports etc. Obviously styling is personal preference. It SUCKED gas though, I do remmeber filling up every two days. A diesel liberty would be worth checking out.

Does anyone know if it will sport a mercedes diesel engine or some chrysler/offbrand engine? As we know, they have cummins engines in the dodges...

Re: Chrysler Announces Introduction of Jeep Liberty 2.8L Common Rail in North Amereica

Mickey - I've always considered the Wrangler to be a PROPER offroad vehicle, with its ladder chassis, solid beam axles, short wheelbase and simplicity. Same setup as a Land Rover Defender 90. I also have a lot of respect for the Cherokees, although build quality is iffy, to say the least.

Those vehicles were conceived as proper offroaders right from the start, unlike most of the PsOS I see here, based on crude pickup trucks, and subsequently emblazoned along the sides with "4x4 Offroad" by the automarketing conmen.

I believe that when Wranglers were imported into the UK, the intention was to offer them with the VM 2.5 diesel, but it sounds as though that never got off the ground, presumably due to the abysmally low numbers.

With the need for more collision-friendly vehicles, the only new Land Rovers now being supplied with a ladder chassis are the Discovery (up for model replacement next year) and the Defender. The Range Rover has just become monocoque, the Freelander always was, and the new Disco will be, according to the reports.

LR seems to have, if anything, enhanced the handling and offroad ability with these newer vehicles, quite a tribute to their engineering expertise.

- Richard

Re: Chrysler Announces Introduction of Jeep Liberty 2.8L Common Rail in North Amereica

I got stuck in my jeep at least 4 times because it didn't have a limited slip differential in the back. Granted this was a '93 wrangler sport, they may have changed since then, I dont know. All I know is I did a lot of offroading with it, and it was great, aside from being stuck with one wheel in the air and one on the ground. The wheel in the air would spin and spin and the one on the ground wouldn't move

Re: Chrysler Announces Introduction of Jeep Liberty 2.8L Common Rail in North Amereica

I got stuck once in my Discovery, in Wales. Pulled on to some boggy, marshy ground one April. ..... Well, it had been solid ground the previous summer!

Thought,... engage low ratio, shove lever over to engage diff lock.......... Nope, 4 wheels just sank deeper - no traction on any of them. I'd taken my chunky winter tyres off the week before. Another Disco which stayed on the tarmac pulled me out, and I've never yet lived that one down!

- Richard

Re: Chrysler Announces Introduction of Jeep Liberty 2.8L Common Rail in North Amereica

. Granted this was a '93 wrangler sport, they may have changed since then, I dont know.

Click to expand...

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Believe me, it hasn't. I had to abandon my Jeep WAY up in the mountains a couple of months ago and hitchhike out.

Eaton is going to start offering their "E-locker" to the aftermarket next year, and Jeep models will be one of the first ones available. And I will be camping out on the doorstep of my nearest Eaton distributor.

Even "Detroit Lockers" and other "automatic lockers" aren't really 100% locking.

100% locking devices are called "spools", often used by drag racers and hardcore offroaders, but they are totally unsuitable for highway use. Currently, the only driver-selectable "spool" is the ARB Airlocker, but it is complex to install and requires a source of compressed air. By the time you get an onboard compressor installed, the price is pretty staggering.

Eaton has been making the electrically lockable "spools" for OEM applications for years, including the one that comes with Toyota's "TRD Offroad Package" on the Tacoma. My '98 Tacoma had the locker, and let me tell you...it RULED! Un-freaking-believable. The rear axle would lock up solid. If there was any traction to be had, that thing would find it.

In terms of keeping wheels turning, a 2wd with a rear locker beats a 4x4 with open diffs.

But when the E-lockers come out, my Jeep is going to have true lockers at BOTH ends! If I get that thing stuck, it'll take a helicopter to extract it.

Or perhaps the winch I'm going to install. I HATE getting stuck. Not to mention the fact that I could die out in the boondocks that way.

-mickey

Re: Chrysler Announces Introduction of Jeep Liberty 2.8L Common Rail in North Amereica

Originally posted by mickey:
Or perhaps the winch I'm going to install. I HATE getting stuck. Not to mention the fact that I could die out in the boondocks that way.

Click to expand...

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Be careful with that winch. Remember the scene in The Gods Must Be Crazy?

Re: Chrysler Announces Introduction of Jeep Liberty 2.8L Common Rail in North Amereica

I love the idea of wider spread availability of diesel engined passenger vehicle. The sole reason we bought our Jetta TDI was for the diesel engine. we would never have given VW a second glance if not for that TDI. I also would love the idea of a diesel Wrangler. I'm looking to buy a Wrangler in the next year or so and if they put a diesel in it I would buy one today. I like that they are putting the diesel in the Liberty, it is a good first step. I don't think I'd get one since I think they look like a cartoon. But compared to it's competition I think the Liberty does well in most respects and better off-roading. If you are buying a Liberty to take on the sledge hammer type trails your insane but for most camping forest "road" type wheeling it does fine. Now if DC would only put a diesel in a Dakota or Ram 1500 and not have it be a $4500 upcharge.

Re: Chrysler Announces Introduction of Jeep Liberty 2.8L Common Rail in North Amereica

Does anyone know if it will sport a mercedes diesel engine or some chrysler/offbrand engine? As we know, they have cummins engines in the dodges...

Lightman,

It will not be the Mercedes 5 cyl but a 2.8L 4 cylinder. I don't know who developed it but it started to be sold in Europe recently. I also figured it would only get 18 MPG in city driving after doing the Liter/KM conversion. (24.5 MPG combined driving)

That really doesn't show off the advancement in fuel efficiencies of the diesel which is what I thought Chrysler was trying to do with this by releasing them before 2006 in the states. I agree that is not a sufficient mileage increase to warrant some buyers to go diesel. Chrysler will be the first one to complain that Americans won't go for the diesel when these first 5000 are sold because nobody will be able to justify the extra sticker cost with that minimum increase in fuel efficiency. I don't know what the extra cost would be but I bet it will be more than a V6 gasser model.

Keep in mind the Liberty is sold currently only with a 4 cyl and V6 gasser.