|
Tekne posted:Watch the videos of the same test with the Touareg and XC70; you'll notice he cuts the turn a lot harder and faster in the Grand Cherokee. There also isn't any recording instrumentation on the steering column when they run these "tests". Finally, Germany's Auto Motor und Sport ran their ISO standard moose test and couldn't destabilize the Jeep with any load even up to maximum weight, which is curious when you combine that with Teknikens Värld inability to produce these results when Chrysler's engineers were present. There could very well be a problem with the vehicle, but I'd be hesitant to believe these results when only TV is producing them. I think we all know that a skilled driver can force a vehicle on to two wheels. That being said, this story isn't clear cut or resolved, and it'll be interesting to see how it plays out as other groups get involved. I also call bullshit on the tests, however... even if Moose screwed with the vehicle and/or cut too hard to try and flip it; that doesn't mean the vehicle is still safe. These are professional(?) drivers on a closed course. Who is to say that a soccer mom would have better control or knowledge of the vehicle in a similar situation? So the results may have been slightly rigged, however I think the average lay-person driver might also be able to reproduce the same problems if driving it improperly.
|
| # ? Aug 5, 2012 22:57 |
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2013 14:55 |
|
|
You can flip a Corvette by driving improperly. That's not the point of these tests.
|
| # ? Aug 5, 2012 23:53 |
|
|
please show me how you can flip a corvette when driving improperly
|
| # ? Aug 6, 2012 00:29 |
|
|
give me a corvette and I'll do my best 
|
| # ? Aug 6, 2012 00:34 |
|
|
Fayez Butts posted:please show me how you can flip a corvette when driving improperly http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1l6TW6OCpc4 (yeah, yeah, still a Corvette rolling  )
BlackMK4 fucked around with this message at Aug 6, 2012 around 01:00 |
| # ? Aug 6, 2012 00:58 |
|
|
Consumer Reports says that they had handling issues with the CRD (?) powered Grand Cherokee as well, but the V8 one worked fine. Also, a re-flash of the stability control resolved their problem. It really does look like a software/active suspension issue. It's not body rolling, it's hopping around the lane change. It's weird (and not reproducible outside that facility either). http://news.consumerreports.org/car...moose-test.html
|
| # ? Aug 6, 2012 01:24 |
|
|
Jonny Nox posted:Consumer Reports says that they had handling issues with the CRD (?) powered Grand Cherokee
|
| # ? Aug 6, 2012 01:39 |
|
|
You Am I posted:Common Rail Diesel. I wish they had offered the CRD in more Jeeps.
|
| # ? Aug 6, 2012 01:46 |
|
|
yeah, but is that the one they were testing? Is there even a gasoline V6 available in Europe?
|
| # ? Aug 6, 2012 01:46 |
|
|
Jonny Nox posted:yeah, but is that the one they were testing? Is there even a gasoline V6 available in Europe? There is, most of the engines they offer in the US are available here. Its the Euro engines that the US doesn't get.
|
| # ? Aug 6, 2012 01:51 |
|
|
Jonny Nox posted:yeah, but is that the one they were testing? Is there even a gasoline V6 available in Europe? Consumer Reports is an American thing, they were testing the last generation version which could be had with a diesel. quote:I wish they had offered the CRD in more Jeeps. You could get a diesel Liberty too. I'm not sure but I think most off road types didn't like diesel, it's much heavier than the gas version and offers no advantage. The Ram Powerwagon is gas only for the same reason.
|
| # ? Aug 6, 2012 01:53 |
|
|
Throatwarbler posted:You could get a diesel Liberty too. I'm not sure but I think most off road types didn't like diesel, it's much heavier than the gas version and offers no advantage. The Ram Powerwagon is gas only for the same reason. It offers TONS of advantages.
|
| # ? Aug 6, 2012 02:14 |
|
|
Such as?
|
| # ? Aug 6, 2012 02:29 |
|
|
Throatwarbler posted:Such as? Torque, low end power, fuel efficiency, power modifications are easier, and with an automatic transmission its a way better rock crawlers.
|
| # ? Aug 6, 2012 02:34 |
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Torque, low end power, fuel efficiency, power modifications are easier, and with an automatic transmission its a way better rock crawlers. I do rock crawling and I prefer a manual. Autos like to creep way too much for my tastes.
|
| # ? Aug 6, 2012 02:42 |
|
|
EightBit posted:I do rock crawling and I prefer a manual. Autos like to creep way too much for my tastes. I prefer manual as well, but seems like a lot of Jeep guys like the auto for some reason.
|
| # ? Aug 6, 2012 02:44 |
|
|
Don't pass people on lovely Louisiana back roads with pot holes and loose gravel.
|
| # ? Aug 6, 2012 03:10 |
|
|
Stanyer89 posted:Don't pass people on lovely Louisiana back roads with pot holes and loose gravel. drat, son. Where was this?
|
| # ? Aug 6, 2012 03:33 |
|
|
Tekne posted:Watch the videos of the same test with the Touareg and XC70; you'll notice he cuts the turn a lot harder and faster in the Grand Cherokee. There also isn't any recording instrumentation on the steering column when they run these "tests". You can't really tell if they cut it harder in the VW and Volvo since there aren't interior views, and the exterior views only show you exactly what the test results were: two of them cut smoothly, one cuts hard and fails the test. I agree that they need instrumentation and independent analysis but you can't say they are biased against the Jeep just from that footage. This whole episode just underscores the importance of a MUCH more thorough independent safety rating. There's the NHTSA in America, the NCAP in Europe, and all kids of stuff elsewhere. If there was an international body conducting a very extensive set of safety regs we could be saving money as well as cleaning up this data. I'm not mad at Chrysler for being less than apologetic. They handled this fine, just as well as you would expect any other company to.
|
| # ? Aug 6, 2012 03:34 |
|
|
I've never run into a single 4-wheeler/offroader/rock crawler who doesn't dream of building diesel things. Hell, every time I mention fullsize jeeps to anyone, I can basically bet they're going to say they'd love to put a 4BT or 6BT in one. Some horrible failure:   Guy I know spent a long time asking questions about how to put dana 30 style steering knuckles and hubs/unit bearings onto a high pinion dana 44 front axle housing for his Jeep build. Everyone told him he was a dumbass for doing that, and that he should stay with the dana 44 steering knuckles, spindles, balljoints, etc. He did it anyways. A few wheeling trips later this happened after a U-joint blew apart. I should note that this is exactly the same failure I had on the dana 30 in the front of my jeep last fall after a U-joint blew apart in it. This is why people like dana 44s (slightly larger balljoints, same size U-joints) and dana 60s (really big balljoints, much bigger U-joints, or kingpins and much bigger U-joints, which makes it almost impossible for the steering knuckle to separate even if the U-joint blows apart under heavy throttle.) kastein fucked around with this message at Aug 6, 2012 around 04:20 |
| # ? Aug 6, 2012 04:12 |
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Torque, low end power, fuel efficiency, power modifications are easier, and with an automatic transmission its a way better rock crawlers.
|
| # ? Aug 6, 2012 04:18 |
|
|
Splizwarf posted:Oil slows wear, it doesn't prevent it. While I am not sure about timnig chains this is not true in many (most?) applications where oil is actually applying enough force to cause the two parts to never touch or preventing the from touching in other ways.
|
| # ? Aug 6, 2012 04:47 |
|
|
Lord Gaga posted:While I am not sure about timnig chains this is not true in many (most?) applications where oil is actually applying enough force to cause the two parts to never touch or preventing the from touching in other ways. Timing chains are usually just an oil bath, not forced into it.
|
| # ? Aug 6, 2012 04:53 |
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Torque, low end power, fuel efficiency, power modifications are easier, and with an automatic transmission its a way better rock crawlers. Plus due to the higher compression on diesel motors, they are better at engine braking, therefore easier to crawl downhill without using the brakes
|
| # ? Aug 6, 2012 06:14 |
|
|
Really? I thought you needed a jake brake or something to do that with a diesel. Do people add them or do non-semi trucks/cars come with them? E: Welp idk I've never driven a diesel. Lowclock fucked around with this message at Aug 6, 2012 around 06:19 |
| # ? Aug 6, 2012 06:16 |
|
|
Lowclock posted:Really? I thought you needed a jake brake or something to do that with a diesel.
|
| # ? Aug 6, 2012 06:17 |
|
|
You Am I posted:Plus due to the higher compression on diesel motors, they are better at engine braking, therefore easier to crawl downhill without using the brakes Not without an exhaust brake (which you would be hard-pressed to find in most consumer level diesels until very recently). Engine braking isn't aided much by compression, as the compressed gas will just push the piston right back down with only slight adiabatic and blowby losses. Gasoline engines can engine brake without an exhaust brake because they have to do work to pull air through the narrow idle circuit/valve. Diesels don't typically have a throttle like gasoline engines. Crawling down a hill without brakes is all about how low your gears go, not your engine's compression. e;fb, severely
|
| # ? Aug 6, 2012 06:19 |
|
|
Transmission design affects it greatly as well - manuals are by default better than most automatic designs, though I've seen autos which disable the overrunning clutches when the shifter is placed into the lowest gear position thus giving good engine braking performance. Still not quite as good as a manual since the torque converter changes things (and it's really not recommended to lock the torque converter at low speed under high torque loads, so you can't just engage the lockup clutch) but it's better than nothing.
|
| # ? Aug 6, 2012 06:37 |
|
|
It's normally very hard to make a direct comparison due to the other differences such as gear ratios, but old Land Rovers have a trump card for this, in that they have the same spec petrol and diesel (and the engines are in fact the same basic unit). On a Series Land Rover, the 2.25 petrol and diesel have the same transmission etc backing them up, and the diesel has better engine braking. On early coilers, you have 2.5 petrol and diesel (turbo and non), again direct comparison, and again, the diesel has better engine braking.
|
| # ? Aug 6, 2012 06:43 |
|
|
Throatwarbler posted:You could get a diesel Liberty too. I'm not sure but I think most off road types didn't like diesel, it's much heavier than the gas version and offers no advantage. The Ram Powerwagon is gas only for the same reason. Outside of North America I don't think people buy Jeeps to go offroad.
|
| # ? Aug 6, 2012 06:44 |
|
|
dissss posted:Outside of North America I don't think people buy Jeeps to go offroad. Land Cruisers 
|
| # ? Aug 6, 2012 07:06 |
|
|
Toyotas are pretty expensive, but people know they're effective - the problem with Jeeps is that they're still a bit of a premium product, and there isn't as much available or at as good a price for modifying them when you compare it to the US. In the UK, Land Rover is still king, with Suzuki and the other Japanese after that. Jeep is further down the chain, their position helped by cheap XJs being readily available. There was also a big drive toward double-cab pickups thanks to a taxation loophole, and the Mitsubishi L200 probably leads the charge there.
|
| # ? Aug 6, 2012 07:16 |
|
|
D C posted:
I have done about 50 timing belt jobs on the Audi's and Passats configured like that. You do NOT need to disassemble to that extent. Who told you that?
|
| # ? Aug 6, 2012 08:10 |
|
|
InitialDave posted:It's normally very hard to make a direct comparison due to the other differences such as gear ratios, but old Land Rovers have a trump card for this, in that they have the same spec petrol and diesel (and the engines are in fact the same basic unit). There is some fallacious thinking going on here. There's no way that the gasoline engine and the diesel engine are the "same basic unit". That would have to be one seriously overbuilt gasoline engine.
|
| # ? Aug 6, 2012 13:31 |
|
|
EightBit posted:There is some fallacious thinking going on here. There's no way that the gasoline engine and the diesel engine are the "same basic unit". That would have to be one seriously overbuilt gasoline engine.
|
| # ? Aug 6, 2012 13:58 |
|
|
InitialDave posted:It's true. The petrol was based on a previous diesel design (from the Series 1) in the first place. They might not be the last word in power or refinement, but they are tough bastards. Doesn't surprise me, I know some people who will take 2.5l Audi Turbodiesel blocks and use them for petrol racers.
|
| # ? Aug 6, 2012 14:00 |
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Doesn't surprise me, I know some people who will take 2.5l Audi Turbodiesel blocks and use them for petrol racers. I assume because you could then force-induction them to the moon?
|
| # ? Aug 6, 2012 14:28 |
|
|
Boat posted:I assume because you could then force-induction them to the moon? Pretty much, with a block that thick you are pretty much only limited by your crankshaft, connecting rods, pistons, and how good your headbolts are.
|
| # ? Aug 6, 2012 14:34 |
|
|
Lord Gaga posted:While I am not sure about timnig chains this is not true in many (most?) applications where oil is actually applying enough force to cause the two parts to never touch or preventing the from touching in other ways. Parts in those applications (like bearings) will still wear at startup due to cold oil's higher viscosity and the time it takes the oil pump to build pressure, it's why we use multi-weight oils and even that's not a perfect solution. Oil does not negate wear, it only reduces it; in some cases to to practically nothing, but everything wears at least a bit.
|
| # ? Aug 6, 2012 14:47 |
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2013 14:55 |
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Doesn't surprise me, I know some people who will take 2.5l Audi Turbodiesel blocks and use them for petrol racers. Good God that would be one hell of a racing block.
|
| # ? Aug 6, 2012 15:59 |
|
