|
Mr-Spain posted:Christ getting the front wheels wet on the tow vehicle auuuuugh It's a lake with a super-deep, super long ramp. That'd never work up here in the Northeast. What do you mean the ramp stops 10' short of MLLW, and hasn't been rebuilt or maintained in 25 years?
|
#
?
May 7, 2015 18:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 06:19 |
|
|
If the Parkinson's cameraman had such hot feet, why didn't he take four steps to the left, and stand in the water?
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2015 19:13
|
|
|
Jeep Cherokee towing capacity: 2,000lbs Boat large enough to need 3 axle trailer: a hell of a lot more than 2,000 lbs, probably 6,000-8,0000lbs
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2015 23:53
|
|
|
Crotch Fruit posted:Jeep Cherokee towing capacity: 2,000lbs Good thing it's a WK Grand Cherokee and not a XJ Cherokee, then! 
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2015 23:58
|
|
|
IOwnCalculus posted:Good thing it's a WK Grand Cherokee and not a XJ Cherokee, then! Why does the 6.1L V8 have a lower towing capacity than the 5.7?
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2015 00:29
|
|
|
QuarkMartial posted:Why does the 6.1L V8 have a lower towing capacity than the 5.7? And both lower than the smallest V6. I was thinking maybe the 6.1 was tuned more for top-end than torque, but wikipedia seems to disagree. Though the 3.0 V6 is a Benz design, they probably use it in heavy trucks in Europe, that explains its massive torque -- equivalent to the '05-'08 5.7. The transmission doesn't seem to make a difference, seing as how the lowest and highest ratings have the same. Maybe some weirdness of which rearend is available with which engine? Like, a stronger diff/lower gears is only an option with certain engines, and the 6.1 gets highway gearing? Chillbro Baggins fucked around with this message at 00:42 on May 8, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 8, 2015 00:39
|
|
Bad Angus! Bad!
|
The 6.1L is in the SRT8
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2015 00:39
|
|
|
QuarkMartial posted:Why does the 6.1L V8 have a lower towing capacity than the 5.7? Towing capacity is often more about brakes, transmission cooling, and suspension than engine power. As mentioned, the 6.1L only comes in the SRT-8, which is decidedly NOT configured for towing.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2015 00:42
|
|
|
Delivery McGee posted:And both lower than the smallest V6. I was thinking maybe the 6.1 was tuned more for top-end than torque, but wikipedia seems to disagree. Though the 3.0 V6 is a Benz design, they probably use it in heavy trucks in Europe, that explains its massive torque -- equivalent to the '05-'08 5.7. The 3.0 V6 is a diesel, and the biggest "truck" it's used in is the Sprinter van. It does put out as much torque as any of the V8s other than the 6.1L though.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2015 02:55
|
|
|
MrYenko posted:Towing capacity is often more about brakes, transmission cooling, and suspension than engine power. But it does have brembo brakes as standard which would work for towing....
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2015 03:13
|
|
|
I'd kill for a CRD powered Jeep.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2015 03:32
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:I'd kill for a CRD powered Jeep. Drive one, that'll fix that. I'm not saying they're slow, i'm saying they're sloooooooooowwwwwwwwwwww. Also smelly, slow, hard to start in the cold, expensive to maintain after 100k and really slow. Not even including the $9000 trim level you have to buy to make the diesel box tickable, it's $4500 over the pentastar v6, and $1200 over the hemi. At 28 highway over 24-v6 and 20-hemi, it would take 252,000 miles to pay for itself over the V6, and 35,000 slow boring miles to pay for itself over the hemi. And that's assuming $3 a gallon, and diesel price = gas price. Powershift fucked around with this message at 03:53 on May 8, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 8, 2015 03:45
|
|
|
Preoptopus posted:But it does have brembo brakes as standard which would work for towing.... The transmission is geared for acceleration, probably not the best when you also have the bigger, more powerful engine. Also the suspension isn't set up for it - I think live axle rear suspensions are limited in that you can have track performance or payload/towing, but not both. The new SRT8s that have IRS also have significantly higher tow capacities.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2015 04:32
|
|
|
My Dad had a diesel grand cherokee... What a pile that thing was. The interior was made of the packaging other interiors come in, it was slow as poo poo and passing others on a 2 lane country road was dicey as gently caress since that engine/tranny combo didn't realize where the powerband on a diesel was. He followed that up with a diesel X5, that one had so many issues they lemon lawed it and got another diesel X5. That one waited for 90,000 miles before it said it wasn't going to start in 200 miles because something was wrong with it's piss tank. That was about $3000 to fix at BMW. Now they have a 2015 subaru outback 3.6R, what a loving hoss that car is. In summary, gently caress diesel SUVs, subie all day nigga (cummins rams are still the poo poo) (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2015 11:41
|
|
|
QuarkMartial posted:Why does the 6.1L V8 have a lower towing capacity than the 5.7? Because the 6.1 weighs more and probably stresses the transmission more, and towing capacity is all about torque, transmission, suspension and braking. It's the same with trucks, the 2WD version of my truck has another 500# of payload and towing capacity, because of the lack of transfer case or front axle weight...
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2015 14:30
|
|
|
Powershift posted:Drive one, that'll fix that. I don't think you understand: I willingly drove a 1.6 diesel NA VW Rabbit cross country. I loved it. And I build diesels and trust me, everyone who bitches about them being smelly and hard to start in the cold either doesn't take care of them or is too busy focusing on the financial implications to actually give a poo poo. Yes diesels are smelly, yes they need help in the winter, I really don't care. Also: There are no HEMIs anymore. Its a marketing term.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2015 15:52
|
|
|
IOwnCalculus posted:Good thing it's a WK Grand Cherokee and not a XJ Cherokee, then! We put a subaru on a dolley and towed it two hours home and then the grand cherokee started shifting fucky a week later. The first one my folks owned started shifting like poo poo after two seasons of towing a boat around. No loving way I'd ever tow poo poo with a chryco auto again. Both jeeps had the stupid factory towing package and were no way over recommended tow weight.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2015 15:53
|
|
|
Taco Box posted:My Dad had a diesel grand cherokee... What a pile that thing was. The interior was made of the packaging other interiors come in, it was slow as poo poo and passing others on a 2 lane country road was dicey as gently caress since that engine/tranny combo didn't realize where the powerband on a diesel was. He followed that up with a diesel X5, that one had so many issues they lemon lawed it and got another diesel X5. That one waited for 90,000 miles before it said it wasn't going to start in 200 miles because something was wrong with it's piss tank. That was about $3000 to fix at BMW. Now they have a 2015 subaru outback 3.6R, what a loving hoss that car is. Diesels are nice, the problem is all of the poo poo that they have to add for US emissions horseshit that fucks them up. My 335D is really loving quick with a tune but the diesel emissions stuff has broken so much I'm going to dump it to Carmax.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2015 16:20
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:I'd kill for a CRD powered Jeep. i saw one of these a couple of months ago that was tuned so poorly that it was
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2015 17:25
|
|
|
BraveUlysses posted:i saw one of these a couple of months ago that was tuned so poorly that it was Sounds like his EGR is jammed. People are loving morons with diesels.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2015 17:27
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Also: There are no HEMIs anymore. Its a marketing term. Care to expand on this? Pretty sure the HEMI is very real and still made.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2015 18:44
|
|
|
El Jebus posted:Care to expand on this? Pretty sure the HEMI is very real and still made. It's not an actual hemispherical head like the original Hemi was.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2015 18:54
|
|
|
IOwnCalculus posted:It's not an actual hemispherical head like the original Hemi was. I thought it was still a hemispherical head... Now that I've read up, I guess they are not truly hemispherical but a little flatter. Ok!
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2015 19:02
|
|
|
High Energy Multipoint Ignition. (it has 2 plugs per cylinder)
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2015 19:12
|
|
|
El Jebus posted:Care to expand on this? Pretty sure the HEMI is very real and still made. Vitamin J posted:High Energy Multipoint Ignition. Pretty much that. It was just a way to play off the idea of the HEMI motors, without actually making a hemispherical head. HEMI in name only, really. Here's the thing too: Everytime I hear someone go on and on about how hard diesels are to start in the cold, I remind them that I ran not one but two diesels in -40 degree weather in Cheyenne, Wyoming with no starting issues. If you are too cheap to replace the glowplugs yearly and are not putting anti-gel in your fuel, that is not the diesels fault, that is yours. CommieGIR fucked around with this message at 19:20 on May 8, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 8, 2015 19:13
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:I don't think you understand: I willingly drove a 1.6 diesel NA VW Rabbit cross country. I loved it. This comes up on this forum every once in a while and the only people to bitch about diesels, from what I've seen, are americans. I don't know why this is. Do you guys expect them to be like a petrol, or something? Everyone else seems to have cottoned on to how great they are and always have been. BlackMK4 posted:Diesels are nice, the problem is all of the poo poo that they have to add for US emissions horseshit that fucks them up. My 335D is really loving quick with a tune but the diesel emissions stuff has broken so much I'm going to dump it to Carmax. Being a BMW doesn't help.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2015 20:22
|
|
|
Slavvy posted:This comes up on this forum every once in a while and the only people to bitch about diesels, from what I've seen, are americans. I don't know why this is. Do you guys expect them to be like a petrol, or something? Everyone else seems to have cottoned on to how great they are and always have been. Perhaps, but we have very strict emissions laws governing diesels over here. All of these things have reliability issues and reduce power/economy.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2015 20:29
|
|
|
I see euro 4/5 cars come from japan all the time. The german ones always have broken emissions poo poo. BMW seem to make a really solid, powerful engine then surround it with emissions gear made as cheap and nasty as humanly possible. This goes for petrol and diesel. There are other brands who manage to meet standards without crippling the engine with a bunch of broken poo poo so I don't think it's inherent to the emission standards, just a price thing.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2015 20:35
|
|
|
Slavvy posted:I see euro 4/5 cars come from japan all the time. The german ones always have broken emissions poo poo. BMW seem to make a really solid, powerful engine then surround it with emissions gear made as cheap and nasty as humanly possible. This goes for petrol and diesel. There are other brands who manage to meet standards without crippling the engine with a bunch of broken poo poo so I don't think it's inherent to the emission standards, just a price thing. Most of the EGR/emissions stuff can be easily bypassed and removed as well, depending upon your state. I disabled the EGR on my ALH TDI.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2015 20:37
|
|
|
My 11 still has all the emissions equipment  About every 3-4 days it smells like a tire fire because it's burning off the soot in the DPF. But it pulls like a train from 1500rpm all the way to 4000rpm. Womp womp. Gonna be fun going from a car that has it's torque come on at 1500 to a car that has a giant turbo and doesn't spool til about 3000. Not to mention going from 42mpg tank average to probably 20-21 tank average.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2015 21:55
|
|
|
Slavvy posted:This comes up on this forum every once in a while and the only people to bitch about diesels, from what I've seen, are americans. I don't know why this is. Do you guys expect them to be like a petrol, or something? Everyone else seems to have cottoned on to how great they are and always have been. I dunno, I'm from the same country from you and in general dislike diesels in cars. Sure they make sense in larger vehicles, but they absolutely ruin small cars for only marginal fuel economy gains. e. I'm especially annoyed that the 'hot' (or at least warmest) version of the current 3 has a diesel engine
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2015 00:52
|
|
|
There is no reason for diesel engines less than 6 liters to exist. if you can't put a 6+ liter diesel in your car, stick with a turbo gas engine. or a small V8. just put V8s in everything.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2015 01:09
|
|
|
Slavvy posted:This comes up on this forum every once in a while and the only people to bitch about diesels, from what I've seen, are americans. I don't know why this is. Do you guys expect them to be like a petrol, or something? Everyone else seems to have cottoned on to how great they are and always have been. diesel != diesel. Different markets formulate diesel differently. Euro diesel is nicely refined and works well in cars, Aus diesel has more sulfur compounds and is generally poo poo in euro diesel cars, China diesel is not much better than bunker oil and will ruin a delicate euro diesel car engine and so on. It could also be that Americans on average don't understand that there will be differences with petrol, but delicate, efficient, clean diesel cars outside the EU are generally poo poo due to the fuel being poo poo. Captain Postal fucked around with this message at 01:15 on May 9, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 9, 2015 01:12
|
|
|
Diesels in small cars make a bit less sense now with GDI engines becoming more common. Although it seems that GDI + EGR is a recipe for carbon on intakes.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2015 02:17
|
|
|
Shifty Pony posted:Diesels in small cars make a bit less sense now with GDI engines becoming more common. But they've found secondary injectors in the intake are more efficient at times which has the added effect of cleaning the valves as port injection traditionally would, so that's really a non-issue. Ford has the 2.7 ecoboost now, and likely the 2nd gen 3.5 following suit that can run boost and combustion pressures similar to that of a diesel. it has all the diesel torque, 375ft/lbs in a 2.7 liter to 420ft/lbs in the mopar 3.0 TDI, and still revs to 6k to make 325hp to the mopar diesel's 240hp. That 2.7 also uses high range cam phasers to scavenge the exhaust eliminating the need for intake-side egr or an EGR valve. This is the first of the second gen ecoboost engines, all of the fancy new tech will likely trickle down to all the other engines as well once they've worked out the kinks in the most abusive conditions they could find, the company truck. You give up 20% in real world fuel economy, but you nearly gain that back on the price difference between gas and diesel, never mind the $4k difference in the engine option price.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2015 02:58
|
|
|
dissss posted:I dunno, I'm from the same country from you and in general dislike diesels in cars. Where did you get that idea? An example I'm intimately familiar with: the kia rio 1.4 petrol is rated at 5L/100km, 6.3 if it's an auto. The 1.4 diesel is rated at 3.6L/100km and I can tell you from first-hand experience is much, much faster and less gutless in general. It also has transmission ratios specifically chosen to game the efficiency tests (120km/h in second, in an auto 1.4L) which makes it terrifyingly slow and thirsty in the real world. Link. I've also found that small displacement turbo engines tend to be a lot less economical IRL than they are on paper. CRDI engines are insanely grunty and fun to drive; I found the 123D much, much more entertaining than all the other variants but the 135i. Being able to casually power drift the car at 3,500rpm is fun, especially when you aren't just dumping money out the exhaust and setting it on fire every time you floor it. The warmest 3 series you're referring to has over 300hp and 600nm, I don't see the problem  Powershift posted:But they've found secondary injectors in the intake are more efficient at times which has the added effect of cleaning the valves as port injection traditionally would, so that's really a non-issue. Lol if you think ford actually test for abusive conditions. Every modern ford I've ever come into contact with that has over 150kkm (falcons aside) has been an utter wreck. I think you're speaking more from general ignorance and personal disdain for diesels than anything concrete, presumably because the only ones you've ever been exposed to have been great honking pickups and lovely old jettas/mercs. I've literally never seen a turbo petrol engine that has better economy than the same sized diesel in the same sized car and the very notion seems pretty absurd. Slavvy fucked around with this message at 07:15 on May 9, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 9, 2015 07:12
|
|
|
I meant putting the engines in work-truck spec picks is the abuse testing, if you've ever seen the way they get driven, you would understand. Same sized engine engine, the diesel will obviously get greater mileage, but will be far, far slower. Nothing I said suggests i believe otherwise. Matching performance, the fuel economy numbers aren't too different. BMW lists the 528i 0-62 at 6.4 seconds, and the 535D at 6.0, Fuel economy is 26mpg city/38mpg highway for the 535D and 23mpg city/34mpg highway for the 528i, which means to pay for the $8,000 option, would take 531,000 miles in the city, or 861,300 miles on the highway.If you're on it all the time(like you have to be for lovely 90hp hatchbacks) a diesel engine will far out-perform a gas in the same performance range economy wise, but here in the developed world if you're doing that you might as well get a V8 anyways and ignore fuel economy. In nearly every situation where a vehicle sold here has a diesel engine option available, It will never pay for itself over the gasoline option of equal performance, and underperforms considerably compared to the gasoline option of equal price plus running cost. I've driven over 300,000kms in diesels, still own 3 of the 6 i have owned in my life. ran them at +35 and -35, from brand new to ragged out. Modern diesels as they are offered to us now are a suckers bet. they lost their longevity advantage when they got increasingly complex meet emissions standards while closing the performance gap. A 3.0 TDI tuaruaureg injector is $350 on rockauto, A 3.5 ecoboost injector is $60. A 3.0 TDI grand cherokee fuel pump is $375, 3.5 ecoboost $130. The gas engine doesn't have a DPF and it's related sensors, SCR and it's related sensors, nothing between the turbo and the tailpipe can shut you down on the side of the road. Nothing between the turbo and tailpipe is hitting 1700 degrees. You don't have to pray you don't see -15*C before fuel stations have switched to winter blends. You don't have to build a skidplate for your piss tank. There are situations in which a diesel engine is the proper choice, almost none of those occur within new passenger vehicles sold in north america. I understand the appeal of them in low power/weight scenarios, but very few of those exist in north america. Your 20,000 kiwi peso micra is 75hp, where our 10,000 canadian dollar micra is 109hp. your $22k 107hp rio is our $14k 137hp rio. I'm sorry your automotive market is so terrible, but that doesn't make diesel engines a reasonable option in the civilized world.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2015 09:27
|
|
|
I used to be a massive diesel fan, but I've realized that unless you have a 30+ km commute each way, you'll kill a modern diesel engine prematurely. They're so slow to heat up that you basically never get them properly warm on short trips, which is absolute murder on everything. And while they're cold, you get worse mileage. Even with diesel cheaper than gas like it is here, you have to be doing like 30K km a year to justify it.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2015 09:50
|
|
|
dissss posted:I dunno, I'm from the same country from you and in general dislike diesels in cars. I don't hate them in principle but I do hate them in practice. Wafer thin power band, laggy with poor throttle response, complexity and breakability vs na petrol cars. Older common rails at least hit mpg targets but the newer ones don't in at least a lot of cases. I had a rental 1.6 tdi insignia a couple years ago. 55mpg on paper, 33mpg reality. I looked at e60 diseasels a couple years ago as well. Owners also not uncommonly reporting mpg in the 30s. Only plus point seems to be you chip any common rail td and gain 30hp at least. Fine for motorway dwelling autobox land yachts that do huge mileages, like the ubiquitous jag xf diesel. Otherwise I feel like they're a lot better on paper than the real world. My wife has had two (Berlingo clone and smax )and I never borrow them. The ford's last owner sunk a grand into a grenading hpfp as well, apparently a very common occurrence with the duratorq or whatever they call it now. One point in their favour appears to be that if all petrols are going turbo in future they will break just as much as diesels.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2015 11:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 06:19 |
|
|
Saga posted:I don't hate them in principle but I do hate them in practice.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2015 12:08
|
|
