By on July 7, 2014

 
2014-Ram-1500-diese-logo-450x337Fiat Chrysler is hungry for more 3.0L VM Motori V6 diesel engines, but capacity constraints are limiting how many engines can be allocated for North America.

VM Motori, a subsidiary of FCA, can build about 100,000 V6 diesel engines, with about half of those destined for North America. The V6 is offered in both the Ram 1500 pickup as well as the Jeep Grand Cherokee.

But a report in Automotive News paints an interesting picture of the demand for the V6 in each vehicle. The take rate for diesel Grand Cherokees has leveled off at about 8 percent, or 15,000 units annually.

By contrast, Ram boss Reid Bigland claims that

“We got well in excess of 10,000 orders in just the first few days that we opened this thing up, and that ordering and demand has really sustained itself,”

According to Bigland, the EcoDiesel Ram 1500s spend an average of 13 days on dealer lots, versus 94 days for gasoline versions. A search of Cars.com shows just 1,839 EcoDiesel Rams, but 3,907 Grand Cherokees, suggesting that the Ram (which sells in much bigger numbers) has a much tighter supply of their oil-burners.

Even so, Manley and Bigland denied that they are horse trading over diesel allocation for their respective brands.

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

150 Comments on “FCA Is Hungry For Diesels...”


  • avatar
    CoreyDL

    How’s this?

    I’m a bit surprised to see such easy adoption by Chrysler customers of these new Italian diesel engines. This leads me to question whether most diesel buyers are aware of where these engines come from. I would think most RAM customers are, whereas most GC customers wouldn’t care or bother to investigate.

    Why choose a rather more risky, less proven Italian diesel over something available in a Ford or GM? The idea of a diesel GC is appealing to me, but I wouldn’t have one until much further down the road.

    • 0 avatar
      VoGo

      Corey,
      I am sure you don’t mean to be offensive, but this kind of thing just comes off wrong on the web. You’re typically a lot more insightful.

      • 0 avatar
        Landcrusher

        VoGo, if you were shooting for sarcasm, you missed. You owe an apology yourself.

        Fiat last sold cars here when their quality was sub par, and that was back when par was going to the dealer multiple times a year under warranty and the rust started to defeat the chassis soon after the warranty ended (which wasn’t even close to today’s warranties).

        This isn’t about any sort of racism or nationalism or ethnic slight. Fiat made their bed, and they can now deal with it. They sold nicely styled, fun little maintenance cars engineered as if parts and mechanics were free. The only people I ever knew that were happy with them enjoyed spending a day in the garage fiddling on them. EVERY WEEK.

        It would be one thing if they had so overcome that reputation in Europe, but they really haven’t. Sure, they are better now, but top notch. No American should feel bad for remembering that Fiat was a poor quality brand and a risky purchase.

        • 0 avatar
          CoreyDL

          VoGo was responding to my original format comment, where I was typing in faux Italian-English accent.

          • 0 avatar
            VoGo

            Thanks, Corey,
            You raise a great point – whereas diesels typically have a great reputation for reliability (big rigs typically go multiple hundreds of thousands of miles), we don’t have a lot of data on VM Motori, at least not in the US.

            I could be snarky and point out that if you have already resigned yourself to FCA levels of quality, you may not be all that picky about the source of engine. But traditionally, Ram diesel buyers put a lot of faith in the Cummins brand, so maybe not.

            I suspect there are a lot of buyers who like the idea of a pickup that gets the mileage of a sedan, and are willing to overlook certain risks to get it.

          • 0 avatar
            Landcrusher

            Great, now I guess I owe Mr. VoGo an Apology.

            Sorry, VoGo.

          • 0 avatar
            VoGo

            We’re all friends, Landcrusher!

            Off topic. I saw a well restored FJ40 on my morning run today. Why do I want one of those so bad?

          • 0 avatar
            Landcrusher

            Because they are just toooo cooool.

          • 0 avatar
            Lie2me

            That’s the worst Italian accent I’ve never read

        • 0 avatar
          mikeg216

          99% eco diesel buyers were never subjected to the dying gasps of fiat, Renault, Peugeot, alfa Romeo, Citroën or Sterling or any other British,French or Italian, half built abortion on wheels. We’ve been living in a global automotive world for 40 years. My 27 year old AMC cherokee has GM and ford and Renault and Chrysler and Lucas parts on it. To top it off it was built in Canada!

        • 0 avatar
          Lou_BC

          I must point out that VM Motori WAS 1/2 owned by GM.
          It is now fully owned by Fiat.

          GM has made crappy diesels – remember their 1st ones in pickups?
          Ford has a stellar reputation courtesy of the PowerStroke 6.0 and 6.4. (sarcasm on).

          The rest of the world has tended to be much more diesel friendly.

          Cummins is the engine that made Ram HD what it is today and a point to note is Iveco which is FCA’s heavy truck subsidiary. They make all sorts of diesel engines. FCA also owns Case.

          The Cummins 6.7 IIRC was co-developed with Iveco.

        • 0 avatar
          ghostwhowalksnz

          VM Motori have been making diesels since 1947.
          Is that long enough for you ?
          They have been active in the marine and heavy duty industrial market.
          Is that a good enough pedigree ? Very similar to Cummins ?
          As for Fiat, they have only a recent connection to the business

          • 0 avatar
            DenverMike

            It doesn’t matter if they’ve been building diesels for 1,000 years. Current diesels are highly technical and delicate instruments. Nothing like primitive diesels my mom could replace the injectors on.

          • 0 avatar
            RobertRyan

            Same is applicable to current petrol/ gas engines. You would not touch them unless you were an electronics engineer

          • 0 avatar
            DenverMike

            You don’t have to be an electronics engineer to work on ANYTHING automotive. But you DO have to be a specialist/diesel tech to work on modern diesels. If your regular indie mechanic does agree to work on your modern diesel, results could be disastrous. He won’t

            Yes gas/petrol engines have also advanced, but not so much that the average backyard mechanic/hack with the right scan tool, can’t figure out and fix on the spot. And with each new generation of gas/petrol engines, they’re becoming increasingly more reliable. Their emissions woes were figured out decades ago. With diesels, OTOH, the fun is just beginning. For the price of just doing the injectors on a modern diesel, you can buy a factory authorized “reman” gas/petrol engine, INSTALLED, if you had too. Point is you won’t.

          • 0 avatar
            Scoutdude

            @ DenverMike, Working on modern diesels is not out of the skill set of the average independent tech or a good DIY’er but you certainly need the proper service info and for some things specialty tools, but that can be said for current gas engines too. If they don’t keep up then there is a similar possibility of them messing something up whether it is gas or diesel powered. Of course since the diesel engine and their parts are usually more expensive it could be more costly to fix the screw up.

          • 0 avatar
            RobertRyan

            @Scoutdude,
            Correct, you need to know what you are doing with right tools and knowledge for both type of engines. Very, very easy getting it wrong, results could be very expensive.

    • 0 avatar
      Jeff Weimer

      For one, Ford and GM don’t offer a diesel in their 1/2 ton trucks. I believe there were plans to do so and engines designed, but they were abandoned in the aftermath of the 2008 crash. This might be enough of an impetus for those two to bring them to market.

      This originally was intended to be a GM engine, a product of the Fiat “alliance” that cost GM $2 Billion to get out of.

      • 0 avatar
        Drzhivago138

        AFAICT, Ford is banking on their new 2.9 EcoBoost in the ’15 F-150 to get at least the same highway MPG as the EcoDiesel, so they can advertise it as cheaper, using $3.60 gas rather than $4.00 diesel.

        And yes, I know the new 2.9 EcoBoost isn’t really comparable with the diesel. But that’s probably another thing Ford is banking on–that customers won’t notice, or care.

        • 0 avatar
          Lou_BC

          @Drzhivago138 – The Ford Transit van will run a small diesel as well as the ecoboost 3.5 and the 3.7 V6.

          If that diesel is going to be approved for USA emissions in the Transit it would be a bolt in application for the F150.

          • 0 avatar
            Big Al from Oz

            @Lou_BC
            It wouldn’t be hard to drop the 3.2 Duratorque into the F-150. This would be the cheapest option as the cost of the 5 cylinder Duratorque is far less than any V6 diesel on the market.

    • 0 avatar
      mike89

      Due to the fact that gas in Italy is among the most expensive in the world (currently it’s nearly the equivalent $9 per gallon, while diesel is a bit cheaper ), Italians buy a lot of diesels. About 60% of all vehicles sold in Italy are diesel-powered, and this has been the case since basically forever. If there’s a country that know a thing or two about diesel engines, it’s Italy.
      And BTW, VM supply/supplied engines to Chrysler, Ford, GM, Hyunday, Kia, and Toyota among others. And Fiat itself also supply/supplied engines to several automakers, including Chevrolet, Cadillac, Suzuki, Opel and Ford.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_VM_Motori_engines
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JTD_engine

      • 0 avatar
        Landcrusher

        Which do you think matters more in the over all market place? The information you just posted, or the stench of Fiat, and Chrysler really, reputation for poor quality.

        • 0 avatar
          George B

          A friend has 2002 Ford Explorer with a French automatic transmission from a transmission family based on the C3 that originated with the Pinto. The transmission has already been refuilt once by his brother-in-law. Also 1st year of production from the Jaque Nasser cost cutting era. THAT would have scared me.

          • 0 avatar
            TEXN3

            French transmission and German engine (assuming the 6). The 2007+ V8 Explorer was, and still is, awesome and way underrated.

        • 0 avatar
          jimboy

          Can’t be any worse than the stench of your stupidity, can it ? Are you some kind of 12 year old that repeats whatever he hears? Get some real facts before you start vomiting all over the web.

          • 0 avatar
            Landcrusher

            Jimboy, your post is big on rude and short on facts. I think any objective judge is going to have to assume you are wrong.

          • 0 avatar

            “Get some real facts before you start vomiting all over the web.”

            Which is what you’re doing right this very moment. Vomiting all over the web.

            How about you sit quietly in the corner and let the grown-ups talk?

        • 0 avatar
          Lou_BC

          @Landcrusher – I’d trust the VM 3.0 much more than the truck it is placed into. I’d have to say the same for the I-6 Cummins 6.7.

          • 0 avatar
            Landcrusher

            I’m no fan of the truck either. Has the resale improved on them? My nephew had a really bad experience with a Cummins Dodge. Big repair bills followed by big depreciation. The only happy Chrysler owners I new totally babied their cars. Even some of those folks were miserable though.

            If I were the competition, I would drop the phrase “Italian Diesel” in every few minutes. I loved the rental Panda I drove a few years ago, but FIAT really blew it here back in the eighties.

            Companies should rightly be punished for their failures. It’s the key to making most of them behave properly.

      • 0 avatar
        mikeg216

        The warranty on all Chrysler diesel engines are 5 years and 100k same as cummins with half the buy in cost. Any early adopters know full well that Europe has been at the forefront of light diesels since forever.

        • 0 avatar
          matador

          True.

          I’d be skeptical as to what happens afterwards. Diesel’s in trucks are pricey to maintain. Are they the same case in cars?

          Remember, I keep vehicles forever. If I were the lease type, why not?

          Long term reliability- only time will tell.

    • 0 avatar
      Big Al from Oz

      @CoreyDL
      Less proven??

      VM use Fiat diesel tech. What is the leading global diesel engine manufacturer? I do think Fiat would be well in front of any US diesel manufacturer.

  • avatar
    CJinSD

    94 days to turn for their highest volume product?

    • 0 avatar
      dartman

      Ram has been stuffing the supply pipeline in an attempt to gain market share. Ready availability and substantial rebates and discounts have helped Ram to surpass Chevrolet in unit sales. The hope is that once buyers experience the upgraded quality and features of the new Rams they will remain loyal going forward. I believe its working.

  • avatar
    RogerB34

    Diesel’s are only a niche market USA.
    A premium to buy and maintenance doesn’t go away.
    A direct injector as in class 8 diesel engines cost about $1500 each.
    Not enough market for GM, Ford and Chrysler in PU’s and cars.

  • avatar
    87 Morgan

    How is this a surprise? Their exists no other option for a half ton diesel. Further, in the west a need exists for a pick up that can tow on occasion but does not need to be a 3/4 ton or one ton. Some items just won’t fit in a transit connect etc. For many the increased cost of the diesel will be offset by the increase in mpg.

    I would bet ford and GM follow suit shortly due to lost market share of there half ton offerings.

    • 0 avatar
      DC Bruce

      All “half tons” today can tow in the vicinity of 10,000 – 12,000 lbs. with a “bumper hitch.” The RAM diesel is not rated as highly as the Chevrolet/GMC with the 6.2 liter gas engine or, if memory serves, as the Ford with “ecoboost” V-6.

      The problem with all these is that you can either tow a lot or carry a lot, but not both at the same time. The RAM in particular can carry just about nothing other than two passengers if it’s towing 10,000 lbs.

      The 3/4 tons let you “have your cake and eat it, too.” Unfortunately, you’re lugging around a lot more vehicle weight when you do that.

      • 0 avatar
        dartman

        No manufacturer rates their truck to tow more than 3,500lbs on a standard bumper hitch, and often much less. To get the max. tow capacity the truck need to have a properly frame mounted weight carrying and weight distributing receiver hitch of the appropriate class rating; III, IV, V etc. Most “tow packages” include a minimum of a properly sized receiver hitch, properly wired electrical connectors. Going further the better packages include additional oil and transmission coolers, larger radiators, uprated springs, tires axles etc. Consider this; On the Ram just changing the rear axle ratio from 3:92 to 3:21 reduces the towing capacity by more than 2,000lbs! If you are ever considering towing anything more than 3,500lbs it is money well spent to go with the factory package.

        A modern trucks tow capacity is more constrained by the tires mounted than most other factors. Those pretty 20″ aluminum rims with low profile tires that are so popular kill tow/load capacity. A 1-ton truck will usually have 17 or 18″ wheels with an “E” rated load capacity tire that is inflated to 65-85 psi. These trucks look almost comical because the wheel/tires seem small on the truck

        • 0 avatar
          RobertRyan

          @dartman,
          Thoughtful reply. No matter what fantasy number the manufacturers claim for the vehicles, the hitch rating, brings those numbers into the real world

      • 0 avatar
        Lou_BC

        @DC Bruce – correct. The thing that kills the Ecodiesel is not the towing capacity but the cargo capacity.

        A 5.7 Hemi Crewcab 4×4 shortbox has a best of 1,460 lb cargo and 10,150. You need to get a more basic bling free truck to get those ratings.
        A blinged out Ram 5.7 drops to 1,084 cargo and 9,750 lb.

        The Ecodiesel fares much worse. At base level it rates at 1,233 lb cargo and 8,750 tow.
        You get one blinged out and you can carry 881 lb and tow 8,400 lb.

        Standard tongue weight is 10-15%. 10% of 8,400 is 840 lb.

        Any one know a driver that weighs 41 lbs?

    • 0 avatar
      mikeg216

      Today’s half tons are rated for 11,000 pounds by companies with hundreds of attorneys and statistical analysis. If they couldn’t safely do it, they wouldn’t be sold. Today’s half ton is last generations one ton.

      • 0 avatar
        ajla

        “Today’s half ton is last generations one ton.”

        Payload is the problem when trying to go over 5-figures towing, at least on the Ram 1500 and Tundra. What’s the hitch weight on a 10000lb trailer going to be?

        The current Ram 1500 has a max tow rating just about 3000lbs higher than what it had in 2001, but it has a nearly identical payload ratings.

      • 0 avatar
        matador

        Bingo. MY 1995 F150 is only rated to tow 3500#. I’m sure I’ve gone over this, but still… only 3500#

        Come to think about it, my old 1992 F250 is only rated for 7700#.

        When did F150s start getting so much towing capacity?

        • 0 avatar
          Drzhivago138

          When they started being bought by the compensation crowd, I guess.
          Our former “nice truck” was a ’98 F-250 light duty, or F-150 with heavy frame, suspension, tranny cooler, and 7-lug wheels
          GVWR was 7700 lbs., and after 1999, they were sold as “F-150 7700′s”.
          The ’06 SuperCrew that replaced it is rated for (I think) 7600 GVW, and it’s only a “light” duty. All F-150 HDs since 2004 have had a GVWR of 8200 lbs., and a tow capacity of up to 11,300 lbs.

          • 0 avatar
            Lou_BC

            IIRC, Ford has 3 different frames for the F150 and I’m not talking about length.
            The max haul F150 has is own frame and so does the max tow F150.

          • 0 avatar
            Scoutdude

            I do not believed in the current generation there is unique frame for the higher load or tow rated F150s however it has been stated that there will be two sets of frames for the 2015 F150, one for the base truck and one for trucks with the highest, or close to highest ratings.

          • 0 avatar
            Drzhivago138

            @Scoutdude: AFAIK on the unique frames on the current generation: the higher-payload, yes, the higher-tow, no, only the suspension.

            I just looked on the Ford website, and the official description for the HD payload didn’t mention anything on the frame being heavier, but after a little searching, it seems the 2012 F-150 Source Book mentioned the HD Payload Package had “frame upgrade (.150 rail thickness).” Why it wasn’t mentioned in the offical description is beyond me.

          • 0 avatar
            RobertRyan

            What happens to similar Pickups Globally, as the use is different, so is the build under the Pickup. F150 has three frames, you get as much variety with their Global equivalent

        • 0 avatar
          Carlson Fan

          Your F150′s wimpy tow rating has to do with the gears in the rear end. My ’93 compact Toyota PU was rated to tow 3500 lbs.

          The tow rating on my ’07 Tahoe goes from 7700 lbs to almost 9K just going from 3;73to 4;11 gears.

        • 0 avatar
          matador

          My truck is just weird. It does have a 3.31 Rear End, but the same truck (With an automatic, though), is rated at 6000# towing.

          I’d rather have the manual. And better gearing. And a longer wheelbase.

          Come to think about it, a newer F150 is tempting. I don’t tow enough to justify it, though. All my loads are less than 3500# anyways.

          • 0 avatar
            Scoutdude

            Yeah a manual trans usually has a lower tow rating. The auto gets the higher rating because of the torque multiplication of the torque converter and that the slip in the converter allows the engine to get into the power band without slipping a clutch.

      • 0 avatar
        RobertRyan

        @mikeg216,
        Some of those ratings are so loosely based that you can drive a Semi through them, That also applies to any potential complainant . It would cost them a fortune trying to nail the companies for negligence.

  • avatar
    cpthaddock

    The 50% of these VM Motori engines that do not head our way, just wondering how long they’ve been on the market and how their reliability has been holding up. Can anyone in the EU offer info?

    • 0 avatar
      RobertRyan

      Not Euro based but they do not appear to have problems, about the same as Cummins. VMotori tens to specialise on smaller engines

      • 0 avatar
        mikeg216

        There will be a ford f-150 diesel, most likely the 3.2 duratorq from the global Ranger. It will be announced in 2015 as a 2016 with their all new 10 speed transmission. Say hello to 30 mpg.

  • avatar
    tuffjuff

    I should point out, it appears Cars.com’s search only shows vehicles that are on the lot. I’ve been stalking the new Subaru Outback and the Lincoln MKC, and dealership websites will show ordered vehicles, whereas Cars.com gives you a greater idea of what’s actually available to go visit.

  • avatar
    SayMyName

    Fiatsler quality being what it is, I wouldn’t be surprised to hear that each diesel-equipped vehicle is actually spec’d with two engines. Dealer keeps the spare handy for when the original inevitably pukes its guts out.

  • avatar
    BigOldChryslers

    I’m hopeful that these engines turn out to be reliable, as an eventual replacement for my 20 year old Cummins. The new RAM2500 / Cummins 6.7L is more truck than I need; on paper this truck looks perfect. I’m not in a rush though. I can wait to see how these hold up, and how they fare against the forthcoming competition.

    • 0 avatar
      bball40dtw

      I wouldn’t expect them to be as reliable or as durable as the big 90s era diesels. Anyone with a 5.9L Cummins, 6.5L Detroit, or 7.3L Powerstroke should hold on to them like they would their small child crossing a busy street.

  • avatar
    Carlson Fan

    Not surprised these things are flying off the lots. And many of these sales are to former Ford & GM truck onwers. PU truck buyers are usually portayed as being very brand loyal, but that’s the exception not the rule. People that use their trucks to tow are all over these 1/2 ton diesels. And they really don’t care if they can run a gas cheaper. The mindset is they would rather spend their money on a truck than at the pump. Plus the pulling power of a turbo diesel while towing with the better fuel economy and more importantly the improved range with between fills is why they will buy it. Don’t expect the same success with diesel Jeep GC. It’s too small to be good for anything other than grabbing groceries and is a lousy tow vehicle.

    • 0 avatar
      bball40dtw

      Truck buyers are more loyal than pretty much every other segment in the US. That isn’t to say that all of them are brand loyal. The prices RAM is willing to deal at plus offering something Ford and GM don’t has certainly helped them win at the expense of their competitors.

      • 0 avatar
        Mandalorian

        Ram’s quality has caught up to the other players and their prices are much more reasonable. That’s a formula for sales success.

        • 0 avatar
          bball40dtw

          I’ve logged significant seat time in all three of the domestic half tons, and I find the RAM to be the least desirable but the cheapest (by far). I would not choose it over a Chevy or Ford, but I understand why someone would.

          RAM finally crossed the quality per dollar threshold to win Ford/GM customers for the first time since before the 2004 F-150 and 2007 Silverado/Sierra went on sale.

      • 0 avatar
        Carlson Fan

        I don’t know every single truck buyer but I know quite a few and they are anything but loyal. One bad experience with a Ford, Chevy, ect., and they’ll be buying something different next time around. And let’s face it they are more in tune with what is available in the automotive market than pretty much anyone other buyer. If getting into a 1/2 ton diesel to tow their favorite toy means dumping their Ford or Chevy, they’ll do it.

        • 0 avatar
          bball40dtw

          They are still more likely to keep buying that brand more than other segments. Studies by Polk, JDPower, etc have consistantly show that. That isn’t to say a bad experience won’t put someone into a different truck. As someone who has made fleet purchases of half ton and three quarter ton trucks, I loyal to a brand when it comes to what I drive, but loyal to the bottom line when it comes to my fleet purchase.

      • 0 avatar
        George B

        I realize that styling is subjective, but I think the Ram 1500 is the most attractive of the full size 1/2 ton pickups. It’s also the only one with an 8 speed automatic. Not sure which engine I’d choose, but I’d consider the VM Motori diesel. Helps that pickup trucks have lots of room under the hood so repairs are not the labor nightmare like they are on a FWD minivan.

    • 0 avatar
      Lou_BC

      @Carlson Fan – nope. These trucks cannot tow or haul or carry passengers all at the same time. Ram has the poorest tow haul ratings in the 1/2 ton class and the VM powered Ram is the worst.

      See my earlier post.

      • 0 avatar
        Carlson Fan

        I don’t know where your getting your tongue weights. An 8400 lb boat will be sitting on a tandem axle trailer and won’t have anywhere near 10 to 15% of that as tongue weight. More like 5% to tow properly. Travel trailers may be different.

        And like i have said before, a lot of times when towing it is not about moving the weight but pushing the air of your way. Especially with a PU. And that is where a diesel shines. Trust me snowmobilers for certain, with their fancy enclosed trailers will be all over these diesel 1/2 tons.

        • 0 avatar
          Big Al from Oz

          @Carlson Fan
          I can see why some want the authorities to increase the level of knowledge for those who tow.

          5%?

          I hope you have trailer sway control and you drive around in 3 gear so you have enough power to pull your sway out of your trailer.

          Most US 1/2 ton pickups have a notoriously low payload. This is bad especially if you want to take the family out camping for a week with a fishing boat. I suppose you can leave the wife and kids at home.

          After the boat is hitched you might have enough capacity to take a case of Coors Light, but that might overload your pickup.

        • 0 avatar
          Big Al from Oz

          Also, Carlson, here’s something to think about. We look at this in aviation quite regularly it’s called C of G, centre of gravity.

          For example by having a 5% tongue weight and the attitude of trailer different to your truck you can transfer the centre of gravity to provide a negative tongue weight.

          Like I stated, you’d better learn how to use a truck and trailer and probably even how to tie truckie hitches.

          • 0 avatar
            Carlson Fan

            Big Al go on any Boating Board and in the towing section tell them you have an 8K pound boat and trailer. The trailer is a tandem axle. Then ask them what kind of tongue weight you should have. No one, and I mean no one, will tell you at least 800 lbs.

            I have been towing a 25′ boat that weighs just under 8K for 11 years now. Tongue weight is around 400 lbs. It tows like a dream. So please don’t try to school me on how to properly set up a trailer.

          • 0 avatar
            RobertRyan

            @Carlson Fan,
            Big issue here with people towing European Caravans. Their low ball weight łeads to a lot of”snaking”. So you avoid any sort of dirt roads, need a friction or electronic sway control device

        • 0 avatar
          Lou_BC

          @Carlson Fan – 10% tongue weight tends to be the minimum recommended tongue weight and 15% the max. regardless of what one is towing.
          some sources say 9% is the lowest.

          Most sources recommend an equalizer hitch for anything over 5K. When properly set up can move 20% of the tongue weight off of the hitch.

          At the end of the day one needs to pay attention to the GCWR of the truck and trailer as well as weight distribution.

          • 0 avatar
            Carlson Fan

            Lou, go on the ShoreLand’r website. They manufacture boat trailers and recommend 5% for multi axle trailers. The general rule is 5-7%.

            I know RV’s for example have a higher percentage for tongue weight compared to a boat. Regardless, I get the point you made in your original post.

      • 0 avatar
        hybridkiller

        “Ram has the poorest tow haul ratings in the 1/2 ton class and the VM powered Ram is the worst.”

        You may be getting a little carried away with the statistical “arms race”. I believe there are plenty of buyers out there towing >3500 lbs but <9200 lbs. This truck fits that requirement nicely imo, and sales seem to support this. Most people don't actually need 10K+ lbs of towing capacity.

        • 0 avatar
          Lou_BC

          @Carlson Fan – thanks. I always welcome extra information.

          @hybridkiller – correct. Most do not tow max loads with any class of pickup.

          One is more likely to overload their truck than tow heavy.

          The point that I was trying to make that is key to pickups is that crew cab pickups overall do not have the cargo ratings to carry people, haul and tow all at the same time.
          Go on vacation and one can easily have 800 lb of passengers and gear in the cab alone. Add some gear in the box and one can get to 1200 lb rather quickly.

          Add a trailer and voila your vehicle is over its capacity.

          I’m sure that many do not haul or tow much of anything with their trucks and many that do are clueless.

    • 0 avatar
      hybridkiller

      “…the pulling power of a turbo diesel while towing with the better fuel economy…
      …is why they will buy it. Don’t expect the same success with diesel Jeep GC. It’s too small to be good for anything other than grabbing groceries and is a lousy tow vehicle.

      +1

    • 0 avatar
      tuffjuff

      @Carlson

      I know all kinds of Wisconsin rednecks who would disagree with your assertion, if only they knew what assertion meant.

  • avatar
    SCE to AUX

    Assuming it test-drives well (as it does in every review), I’d buy it. The 8-speed auto is supposed to be quite nice, and it would be great to consume 33% less fuel, even if diesel is costing 20% more these days.

    It’s really tough to get good fuel economy out of a Hemi, and the resale value of the diesel will be better.

    • 0 avatar
      Scoutdude

      We will have to wait and see if the diesel has better resale value than the Hemi or not. If the engine turns out to be a dog it might signal the return of the “deduct 50% if equipped with diesel engine” to the notations in pricing guides. OK so it is unlikely to be as bad as a GM diesel, oh wait a minute it is a GM diesel, or at least that was the original intention and GM did call some of the shots on its design. So yeah we will have to wait and see if the engine stands the test of time in this application and if after they have been on the market for awhile if people are enamored with them enough to keep that resale value high.

      Yes currently on average the additional money spent on the diesel is recouped at a higher percentage than the rest of the vehicle but a stinker engine could change that in an instant. A great example is the early Honda Civic Hybrid. In general for most vehicles the Hybrid option retains a lot of its value but on those known troublesome Civics are worth $1000 less than the standard model.

      • 0 avatar
        hybridkiller

        “OK so it is unlikely to be as bad as a GM diesel, oh wait a minute it is a GM diesel, or at least that was the original intention and GM did call some of the shots on its design.”

        Somehow I doubt the GM engineers said, “You guys have a pretty decent motor there, but we’d like to build in a few of the mistakes we made 30 years ago”.

        • 0 avatar
          Scoutdude

          Sure they might not have chosen to purposely make mistakes. However they certainly could spec things that could compromise durability and reliability to save $1 per engine, Wouldn’t be the first time GM has done that.

          • 0 avatar
            hybridkiller

            “…they certainly could spec things that could compromise durability and reliability to save $1 per engine…”

            That’s possible, but you’re making 2 assumptions to get there:

            1, that GM did in fact do that with this engine, and
            2, that absent GM’s influence FCA/VM Motori decided to keep your hypothetical downgrades in place, knowing the potential consequences for them.

            It’s a different world than it was 30, 20, even 10 years ago. The market is much more competitive and indications are that companies like GM, Chrysler (now under Fiat), even VW – who all at some point in time were turning out some pretty sloppy vehicles – have stepped up their game in a big way.

            “Past performance is not necessarily indicative of future results”

            It’s good to bear that in mind occasionally.

          • 0 avatar
            Scoutdude

            You are correct that “Past performance is not necessarily indicative of future results” however in the absence of any significant changes past performance is the best metric to infer future performance.

            The reality is that every automaker looks to cut costs and weigh the potential issues with the potential increase in current profits.

            Remember at the time Fiat was on the verge of bankruptcy, they didn’t agree to sell a portion of the company to GM because they were in great shape. They also didn’t invoke the clause that required GM to purchase the rest of Fiat due to a lack of improvement of their outlook. Of course GM avoided that by paying Fiat large amounts of cash to take back the portion that GM owned.

            So maybe GM didn’t make a cost cutting move to save that hypothetical $1 per engine but in the absence of GM involvement who is to say that Fiat didn’t require the engineers to shave $2 per engine to increase profits.

            Yes past performance and all that but the fact is that Fiat was struggling and would be in very bad shape had they not sold part of the company to GM and then got paid to take it back and then get paid to take Chrysler. So if anything I’d be more worried about the Fiat/VM people cutting costs at the expense of durability or reliability.

          • 0 avatar
            hybridkiller

            Like I said, different world, more competitive. Mediocrity doesn’t cut it anymore – consumer expectations have raised the bar significantly in the last ~5 years or so. If I can see that, then you can bet your a$$ the auto execs can too. They’re not children, they have a long view as well as a short-term profit one.

            Greed, complacency, and recalcitrance are what nearly killed GM and Chrysler, not stupidity.

          • 0 avatar
            Scoutdude

            Sure expectations have risen but that doesn’t mean that the bean counters can see it from their balance sheet.

            The reality is that from my understanding this engine was not designed from the start to be used in the NA pickup market. So only time will tell how well it will hold up in this application.

  • avatar
    thelaine

    I don’t know the range of diesel vs gasoline for this truck, but having a significantly longer range can be an important consideration for buyers who drive long distances or who like to go on camping/hunting excursions.

    • 0 avatar
      Lou_BC

      @thelaine – I’d love a small diesel for those reasons and also combined with the fact that if one travels remote areas of the country there is always heavy machinery out their which runs on diesel.

      The biggest problem for me is the fact that the Ram Ecodiesl in a crew cab at best has 1,233 lb cargo. You add any extras and that eats into cargo capacity.

      A diesel HD is complete overkill for me.

      The 2015 Power Wagon has been emasculated in the name of a better ride. It has around 1,500 lb cargo which is down over 300 lb from its predecessor.

      Ram has gone to clearly delineated cargo capacities. It hasn’t hurt sales but for someone like myself who actually looks at cargo capacity as an important need, it rules out the Ecodiesel and pretty much any 1/2 ton crewcab from Ram.

  • avatar
    SweDane

    Comparing the VM diesel with the old GM 6.5 and Ford’s Power Stroke is an apple to orange comparison.
    The VM is hi tech diesel not to be compared with the boat anchors from Ford and GM – the VM is in a different League !
    In Europe this engine are used in the Lancia badged 300 c in the same manner as Chrysler used the MB OM 642 in the old 300 c
    These are great engines they are tough and durable – the VM was originally designed by VM for Cadillac !

    • 0 avatar
      RobertRyan

      @SweDane,
      Correct those older diesels are pretty primitive devices compared to the VMotori

    • 0 avatar
      bball40dtw

      I agree, even though I brought those engines up above. That also means if someone liked their 5.9L I6, that doesn’t mean this VM engine is right for them. I disagree with the 7.3L power stroke being a boat anchor though.

      • 0 avatar
        Big Al from Oz

        @bball40dtw,
        Those diesels you speak of wouldn’t be competitive here in Australia and probably the EU or Asia.

        Boat anchors they are.

        • 0 avatar
          bball40dtw

          They are all 20+ years old. The Cummins I6 is 30 years old. I wouldn’t expect them to compare, performance wise, to current diesels. They aren’t competitive in the US. The 7.3L in all of its goodness is outclassed by the current Ford Scorpion diesel.

          If someone wants to call the 6.7L Scorpion a boat anchor, I can’t help them. They need to stay away from the internet for awhile.

    • 0 avatar
      Hummer

      Not sure how being technologically advanced makes it better. Those old diesels could throw a lot of trash onto the burners and take it like candy, now expect a couple grand in repairs if a little something gets in there. The 6.5s sibling was down rated in box trucks to get ~30mpg… In a box truck. And there definately wasn’t any DPF urea nightmare equipment, makes almost every modern diesel worthless compared to the gas equivalents in the 3/4-1 ton category. Cost more, worth less. Check out how well an 06 duramax 6.6 holds value, insanely well as its the last year before diesels became reliability nightmares.

      Unless your speaking solely performance, which isn’t what a diesels for, then your way off. Besides across the pond you guys act like VWs are some reliability dream come true, how can we trust that funny talk. ;)

      • 0 avatar
        RobertRyan

        Not from across the pond and we do get the Ford and Chevrolet diesels

        • 0 avatar
          dartman

          ….Uhhh, correct me if I am wrong, but IIRC the GM Duramax is an Isuzu designed joint venture product; so technically part of it’s genealogy comes from across the “western pond”. Ford has a rich history of manufacturing smaller diesel engines at its UK subsidiary in Dagenham. For its first foray in the light truck diesels it farmed out the work to International (nee Navistar) with mixed results, until recently when it brought the project back in house..results too new to judge,

          • 0 avatar
            Scoutdude

            Yes the Duramax is a JV with Isuzu.

            Ford has made diesels around the world that span a wide range of displacements.

            The first Ford pickups with diesels used the existing IH 6.9 that was developed for IH’s own use years before they started showing up in Fords. In fact it was co-developed with their new for the 70′s MV series gas engines designed to be interchanged with each other. They share common mounting and accessory drive systems they even shared the same water pump, rear main seal and rear main seal housing. IH had intended to put the gas version in their Pickups for the 1974 model year and spent a fair amount of money redesigning the chassis to accept the new engine. Various delays meant that it wasn’t ready for production at the beginning of the model year and the energy crisis sealed it and their pickups fate. Had it went into production earlier there is a good chance that the 6.9 would have went in their own trucks for late 1974 or 1975.

            Ford did have a hand in the development of the Power Stroke providing the electronics portion of the system and funding.

            The 6.0 was rushed into production without proper durability testing to earn as many emissions credits as they could. That engine of course led the to divorce and International keeping all of those credits which allowed them to avoid installing DEF systems on their trucks for a number of years.

          • 0 avatar
            RobertRyan

            @dartman,
            Wrong pond, Asian Diesels are in a different league to the European ones. They are not not as torque rich as the European units, but they are awfully reliable.Yes Ford’s Dagenham facility in England produced all their small diesels for Ford, including the 3.2 unit for the Transit

          • 0 avatar
            Big Al from Oz

            Which Duramax Dartman?

            VM designed the 2.8 Duramax in Italy.

      • 0 avatar
        BigOldChryslers

        > Check out how well an 06 duramax 6.6 holds value, insanely well as its the last year before diesels became reliability nightmares.

        When my dad was looking for a truck to replace his ’88 Suburban with the 6.2L diesel, I specifically told him to get a 2006 Duramax. Second gen Duramax so no chance of the cracked injector bodies contaminating the oil problem, and one year before the new emissions equipment was added. That`s what he got, and he’s been very happy with it.

    • 0 avatar
      Hummer

      That’s not to say this is a bad engine, I’ve heard no problems of it, but to not be skeptical is crazy.

      Plus anything with the “Eco” prefix cannot be above suspicion.

    • 0 avatar
      Scoutdude

      The original Power Stroke was a hi tech diesel, it was the first mass market, widely popular electronically controlled diesel. The new motors are not more “hi-tech” they do have additional equipment but that is to meet emissions standards but the basic operation of current diesels use the same or similar principals of operation as the original Power Stroke.

      • 0 avatar
        Big Al from Oz

        @Scoutdude,
        The PowerStroke was based on the Lion diesel from the UK. It isn’t a high tech diesel. It was always designed as a light commercial diesel.

        • 0 avatar
          bball40dtw

          He is referring to the original Powerstroke engine. That engine predates the Lion series of engines.

        • 0 avatar
          Scoutdude

          No the original engine to carry the Power Stroke name was based on the International 6.9 introduced in the mid 70′s. Its original application was for MD trucks where it provided good service for many years before Ford started putting it in pickups. The 6.9 got enlarged to 7.3 and then Ford and International worked together to transform it into the PowerStroke which also did duty in both companies MD trucks.

          The current version of the Power Stroke V8 sold in the US has nothing architecturally in common with the “Lion” engine. Lion engine; DOHC and traditional head layout with intake ports inside the “V”. The 6.7 uses cam in block, reversed head layout with the exhaust ports inside the “V”. Just to name the most significant differences. Sure they use similar injection set ups that are based on the original Power Stroke.

          • 0 avatar
            NoGoYo

            If I recall correctly, the 7.3 Power Stroke is exactly the same as the T444E fitted to International 4000 series trucks and buses. I’m sure they don’t make it any more, though.

          • 0 avatar
            Scoutdude

            Yes a T444E is the same long block as the PS 7.3 and they T444 is the same as the 7.3 though in the Internationals you had some choice of HP ratings.

            Yes the PS 7.3/T444E was discontinued when the PS 6.0/VT365 was introduced.

      • 0 avatar
        Big Al from Oz

        @Scoutdude,
        When I say “based”, I’m saying the actual design of the diesel is a Lion, but enlarged.

  • avatar
    mulled whine

    According to hybridcars.com, which published the monthly diesel sales by model, the jeep grand cherokee sold 151 units in June, which is a 1 % take rate – not 8%!

    With 3900 units on cars.com, then there is a 28 month supply.

    I have no idea where hybrid cars gets its numbers, but who is correct – them or this article?

    Personally, as someone who drives a diesel (golf) I sincerely hope all diesel models are successes.

    • 0 avatar
      Scoutdude

      Why would you want all diesels to be successful if you drive a diesel? The more diesels that are sold the more you are likely to pay for fuel compared to gasoline. If I were you I’d want everyone else to stop buying diesels so that your fuel cost could potentially go down instead of up.

      • 0 avatar
        hybridkiller

        Medium and heavy duty trucks account for well over 90% of US diesel consumption, so even if you doubled the number of diesel passenger vehicles it would barely make a dent in fuel demand.
        OTOH, more successful diesel passenger models means more competition and more choices for the consumer – and larger scale eventually means cheaper replacement parts.

        • 0 avatar
          Scoutdude

          Yeah bot those Locomotives, MD and HD trucks don’t normally fuel up at your local C-Store so yes increasing use of diesels in consumer vehicles will drive the price of diesel up for the average consumer. As it is they already need to do more than straight distillation to produce the amount of diesel to meet demand. That is why diesel is no longer cheaper to make than gas and why it is priced higher at the pump in most areas of the US most of the year.

          • 0 avatar
            hybridkiller

            Several reasons for diesel being more expensive – it’s taxed higher, home heating oil demand (it’s basically high-sulfur diesel) affects the fuel price, and so on.
            Wholesale energy prices are determined on the commodities markets – has nothing to do with where it’s sold.
            Convenience store gas stations make their money on coffee and donuts – their margin on fuel is pennies per gallon. They sell fuel in the hopes you’ll come inside and buy other stuff.

            I’m going to repeat myself in case it wasn’t clear to you the first time – commercial trucking uses >90% of diesel fuel sold in the US – any increase in passenger car demand would be a rounding error.

          • 0 avatar
            Scoutdude

            Yes home heating oil plays a huge part in the price of diesel which is one of the reasons why the price spread is higher in the winter than it is in the summer. The other reason is that truck and rail shipments increase greatly as the Christmas shopping season draws near.

            The 6 cent higher federal tax also plays a small part in that, at the local level there are states that tax diesel at a greater rate per gallon, those that tax it the same and some that tax gasoline at a higher rate. According to the info I found on average at the state level diesel is taxed at a lower rate than gas, but only a half of a cent. Note that is an unweighted average if it was weighted to consumption that spread would likely be higher, as CA taxes gas 3.3 cents per gallon more than diesel and many of the states that tax diesel at a higher rate are relatively low population.

            Have you ever noticed that despite gas being a commodity the price at the pump can vary significantly within a few miles. Why is that? The answer is that it is because the individual retailer sets his own price based on what that retailer thinks he can get. If they are smart it is the right balance between the cost per gallon and the number of gallons they will sell to end up with maximum profit. So if a station, particularly one that doesn’t have a lot of competition for diesel near it notices an increase in their sales, particularly if it bumps into their quota which is likely in some areas in the winter then they will raise their price at their pump. When the next closest competitor notices that they too are experiencing more demand then they too will raise their price.

            So yes if consumer use of diesel goes up the price will rise to the consumer. May not be a huge increase but an increase none the less.

        • 0 avatar
          RobertRyan

          @hybridkiller,
          In Europe the price of diesel fuel has dropped as more refineries came online to produce as a by product of demand

          • 0 avatar
            hybridkiller

            Thank you, please explain that to Scoutdude.

          • 0 avatar
            hybridkiller

            “Have you ever noticed that despite gas being a commodity the price at the pump can vary significantly within a few miles.”

            No, I haven’t noticed that, and I travel quite a bit and purchase diesel. Even in the relatively small towns I go through there’s always plenty of competition and choices available. The noticeable price swings are from state to state, and that’s clearly taxes.
            Along the interstates the big truck stops are right next to the passenger car outlets, and we’re all paying the same price for diesel. That’s why I’m trying to get you to see that trucking in the US is the overwhelming factor driving diesel prices.

            Brother, don’t take my word for it, do some research – google it for God’s sake.

          • 0 avatar
            Scoutdude

            But when you distil crude oil you get a certain mix of products from each barrel. It does vary depending on the type of crude and the exact processes involved. So if you want to build a new refinery to produce an extra X gallons of diesel you’ll end up with about 2X gallons of gasoline. Guess what that does to the price of gasoline?

          • 0 avatar
            hybridkiller

            It doesn’t work that way anymore, it’s not a fixed ratio as you’re suggesting.
            Modern refining techniques can crack the hydrocarbon molecules into smaller sizes to push the production output in the direction of higher demand, gas or diesel.
            Also you can produce diesel from heavy crude, gasoline has to come from light sweet crude. Guess what there’s more of?

          • 0 avatar
            Scoutdude

            @hybridkiller, they you probably should get out more. I just looked up the prices in my area and within about a mile of each other there are 2 Arcos and one of them is getting 9 cents more per gallon than the other one.

            The stations closest to my house charge about 25 cents more per gallon than the ones just another 5 miles away.

            Yes if you go to the combo gas station truck stops on the interstate you’ll find that the diesel is the same price at the gas and truck island, baring any tax discounts to commercial truckers with the proper permit as is done in OR. You’ll also find that frequently all of the stations located at that interstate exit are at the exact same prices. You’ll find that in some areas too. Back when my wife still had family living in Bismark ND I found that there every single station in the city limits had the exact same gas price no matter what the brand was on the sign.

            What you need to google is the law of supply and demand and then factor in the fact that for every gallon of diesel you are producing you get about 2 gallons of gas. Yes you can shift that ratio but doing so is more expensive that old fashioned distillation which again is one of the reasons that diesel is more expensive than gasoline currently. In the old days they could get enough diesel through straight distillation, but to meet today’s demand they have to use more complex and more expensive processes and invest in the equipment to do so (and of course deal with all the regulatory costs and nightmares).

          • 0 avatar
            hybridkiller

            You’re basing your conclusions on the 5 miles around your house, and I need to get out more? Careful bro, you’re straying into idiot territory now.
            See my last post, we’re not stuck with that 2:1 ratio anymore.

            You’re clinging to what you think you know to make a point and it’s not working.
            I’m done.

          • 0 avatar
            dartman

            @hybridkiller,

            I call BS. Anyway you slice it you are going to get about 40-50% gasoline from a barrel of oil, and 15-20% diesel. Diesel is inherently more dear than gasoline. That is not say it is immune from the laws of supply and demand, and at times may trade for less than gasoline; see Mr Ryan’s comment above.

            From the EIA website: http://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.cfm?id=7110

            “Crude oils that are light (higher degrees of API gravity, or lower density) and sweet (low sulfur content) are usually priced higher than heavy, sour crude oils. This is partly because gasoline and diesel fuel, which typically sell at a significant premium to residual fuel oil and other “bottom of the barrel” products, can usually be more easily and cheaply produced using light, sweet crude oil. The light sweet grades are desirable because they can be processed with far less sophisticated and energy-intensive processes/refineries.”

          • 0 avatar
            Scoutdude

            @Dartman, Hybridkiller is correct to a point, using straight distillation you get a fixed ratio of products which does vary between the different types of crude oil. However there are processes and equipment that allow refineries to manipulate those ratios. The problem is that adds to the cost of producing the product you want more of and reduces the percentage of other products.

            So change that mix to make more diesel and the average cost of production of a gallon of diesel will increase assuming the cost of crude stays the same.

            @Hybridkiller, while gasoline and diesel are commodities at the refinery and initial distribution levels between the bulk plant and the station they no longer act as commodities. Virtually every station that carries an oil company brand has to buy their fuel from that company and there is usually only one distributor for a given brand in a geographic location.

            Now of course when it comes time for you and I to buy some it becomes a commodity again. However we do have a free market in the US and the retailers can sell it for what they think their local market will pay. That is why the only time I’ll buy gas from my local stations are when I need gas for the lawn mower. Otherwise if in the course of my daily travels I’m in one of the areas where gas is cheaper or much cheaper than the station closest to my house I’ll check my gauge and fill up then rather than wait until the low fuel light warning has came on.

          • 0 avatar
            Lou_BC

            Heating oil does play a part in the price of diesel.
            I’ve read paranoid types stating that the USA Government prefers to keep the general public out of diesels since the US military consumes massive amounts of diesel and jet fuel. All I have to do is work in a Nazi angle and I’ve covered Godwin’s law ;)

          • 0 avatar
            dartman

            @Scoutdude

            I now call BS to you. Yes the ratio can be manipulated …15-20% gasoline vs 40-50% gasoline; a pretty narrow spread. Independent sellers of fuel are only tied to a major oil company by virtue of advertising and marketing..i.e. credit cards and promotions. The actual gasoline may come from any number of refineries. Chevron gas may come from a Valero refinery as does the Shell product. The only difference is the additives that are added post refining; i.e “techron” etc. The basic gasoline is the same based on vapor pressure, octane rating and percentage of ethanol etc. The various additives do make a difference in engine performance primarily related to engine cleanliness and corrosion and are rated as tier 1, 2, 3 etc by the major oil companies and the EPA. Fuel in the US and diesel in particular has had higher levels of sulfur until recently in both diesel and gasoline compared to Europe. Talk to any European car manufacturer engineer and they will tell you that the past high levels of sulfur (sour crude) in US fuel have caused more problems with the modern direct injection engines than any one problem. Like “leaded” gasoline, sulfur provided a cheap method of lubrication to vital engine parts such as injectors and valves that allowed the use use of cheaper materials in manufacturing. The elimination of leaded gasoline due to its incompatibility with catalytic converters mandated by the Clean Air Act (EPA) and the subsequent improvement and hardening of materials in valve train components eliminated a common maintenance practice known as the “valve job”…I performed a few in my day. When was the last time you heard of any modern engine requiring a “valve job”; i.e the grinding of the valve stem and seat itself? (not a simple adjustment) Interesting enough all of the “lead” in all gasoline was provided by the Ethyl Corporation which was a joint venture between General Motors and Standard Oil of New Jersey (aka Exxon)…Premium high octane gasoline used to be known by the brand name of “Ethyl”…imagine that…

          • 0 avatar
            Scoutdude

            @Dartman what are you calling BS on you agree that the ratio can be manipulated with in a certain range and the exact ratio you end up depends on what you start with and how much you are willing to spend to manipulate the ratio.

            Yes the raw gas that leaves the refinery is a commodity and the stuff that comes out of a brand X pump may have came from Brand Y refinery. The individual specific additive package that is or isn’t added before it heads to the station is what brands it. If you’ve got a sign that says Chevron out front and the required Techron advertising you are required to purchase fuel from the Chevron distributor that services your area. Now if you are Safeway, Costco or Joe’s gas and grub you are free to purchase your fuel from anyone that will sell it to you. However pricing is based on volume and most stations will still buy most if not all of their fuel from a single distributor/brand for that reason.

            Way back in the day when I was in college I worked at a gas station. The owner was the distributor for Mobil in the area and had over a dozen stations. Most did carry the Mobil brand but he also had Arco and Texaco branded stations. I worked at one that carried the Star and I usually worked Sun nights so I received the weekly shipment which came in a Texaco branded truck. However he owned his own trucks and would haul his own Arco fuel for his Arco branded stations and Mobil to his and other Mobil branded stations.

      • 0 avatar
        mulled whine

        I want diesels to be successful, so there are more diesel models to chose from. I

    • 0 avatar
      bobman

      @mulled whine the 8% take rate was taken from the article provided by the link in the article. It was originally stated by Mike Manley, CEO of Jeep. Surely he would know. Do you think they would inflate that take rate? For what purpose?

      • 0 avatar
        mulled whine

        I wonder where hybrid cars got its 151 number from? They are saying only 755 diesel grand Cherokees have sold all year… A sales rate that would hardly be worth offering that model.

        • 0 avatar
          hybridkiller

          Remember, at $40-50K a pop there’s a pretty good margin on these things, they don’t need to sell a ton of them to make money on the model.

          • 0 avatar
            Scoutdude

            They need to sell a ton of them to break even as there is significant costs associated with certifying a power train combo for sale. Sure the high margin will shorten that amortization period but until they have recouped the cost of certification and other fixed costs associated with offering an additional power train option they haven’t made a single penny.

  • avatar
    bobman

    The article in which Manley stated the eight percent take rate was within the context of whether Jeep would offer a diesel for the Cherokee model. That’s where he stated that the current take rate on the JGC was eight percent. He said that the rate would have to double before they would consider offering a diesel for the Cherokee. Perhaps, because of the reason @Scoutdude stated regarding ROI.

    • 0 avatar
      Scoutdude

      Yup I was wondering if the diesel GC was actually making them money. It sounds like they aren’t projecting that they will clear a profit on it if they are saying that they need to see the Grand Cherokee double its take rate before they are willing to put a diesel in the Cherokee. Sounds like unless things change dramatically the diesel Grand Cherokee will only last for as long as they can keep using the current version.


Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Subscribe without commenting

Recent Comments

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Staff

  • Contributing Writers

  • Jack Baruth, United States
  • Brendan McAleer, Canada
  • Marcelo De Vasconcellos, Brazil
  • Vojta Dobes, Czech Republic
  • Matthias Gasnier, Australia
  • W. Christian 'Mental' Ward, Abu Dhabi
  • Mark Stevenson, Canada
  • Cameron Aubernon, United States
  • J Emerson, United States