Jump to content
Create New...
  • William Maley
    William Maley

    Why No Turbo-Four in the Jeep Gladiator?!

      Comes down to towing capability

    We have been wondering for some time why the mild-hybrid eTorque powertrain was missing from the Gladiator's available powertrains. The eTorque powertrain pairs a turbocharged 2.0L four-cylinder with a 48-volt mild hybrid system. This not only improves overall fuel economy, but provides slightly more torque than the 3.6L V6 - 295 vs. 260 pound-feet. We assumed the reason came down to possible issues with towing. It seems our hunch was right.

    The Drive reached out to FCA to see why the Gladiator wasn't being offered with the eHybrid. This was the response from the spokesperson.

    "The 3.6-liter engine can handle the temperatures seen while towing."

    Reading between the lines, it seems Jeep doesn't expect eHybrid powertrain to handle the towing duties of a pickup truck. The Gladiator is rated to tow a max of 7,650 pounds, beating the Chevrolet Colorado Diesel by 50 pounds.

    Source: The Drive

    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments

    38 minutes ago, riviera74 said:

    Wise decision.  Save the hybrids for Chrysler cars and minivans.

    But I thought RAM had a Tow capable 48V Hybrid system already? Why not use it here?

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Just now, dfelt said:

    But I thought RAM had a Tow capable 48V Hybrid system already? Why not use it here?

    Maybe packaging issues?   The RAM has a lot more space than the Wrangler/Gladiator under the hood...

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    No benefit to the system.  Ram Rebel E-torque is rated for 22 MPG and gets 17.5 in real world testing over to the TFL... worse than the high-powered 6 cylinder in the Raptor and the good ol' 5.3 in the Chevy Trail boss.  All that for a hefty price premium over the normal Hemi.  LOL.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    31 minutes ago, daves87rs said:

    Well, if you’re out in the middle of nowhere, where are you going to charge it? 😮 

    Just not sure of the use in a Jeep.....

    FCA 48V hybrid system assists the ICE power train with much added instant torque and reduced fuel consumption. You can run it on pure gas and still get the electric benefits, you just would not have pure electric range till the battery was charged up.

    • Haha 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    1 hour ago, dfelt said:

    FCA 48V hybrid system assists the ICE power train with much added instant torque and reduced fuel consumption. You can run it on pure gas and still get the electric benefits, you just would not have pure electric range till the battery was charged up.

    Yeah, I know-just being sassy.. 😉 

    • Haha 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    On 12/6/2018 at 10:57 AM, Robert Hall said:

    Maybe packaging issues?   The RAM has a lot more space than the Wrangler/Gladiator under the hood...

    An E-class has a 48 volt hybrid and 6 cylinder under the hood, if it fits there, I am sure it would fit in a Jeep.

    They have a turbo 4 in the Silverado, so how can they make it work and not overheat but Jeep can not?

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    9 hours ago, dfelt said:

    Choice does humans good! :D 

    Sure, at an estimated TEN THOUSAND dollar premium over a normal Wrangler, I am sure they will sell like hotcakes off an electric griddle.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    3 hours ago, ocnblu said:

    Sure, at an estimated TEN THOUSAND dollar premium over a normal Wrangler, I am sure they will sell like hotcakes off an electric griddle.

    Who says it will cost an extra $10K? 🤷‍♂️

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    1 hour ago, dfelt said:

    Who says it will cost an extra $10K? 🤷‍♂️

    I guess that was inferred from this paragraph at the linked story..

    Jeep said that the Wrangler plug-in will launch in 2020. It will likely cost a fair bit more than a basic Wrangler, considering the fact the base Pacifica Hybrid is about $13,000 more than a base non-hybrid version. Some of that is probably due to equipment differences, but the hybrid powertrain will still probably command a premium of a few grand.

     

    History has shown that no matter the price of options, the Wrangler still sells well..

    • Like 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    16 minutes ago, Robert Hall said:

    I guess that was inferred from this paragraph at the linked story..

    Jeep said that the Wrangler plug-in will launch in 2020. It will likely cost a fair bit more than a basic Wrangler, considering the fact the base Pacifica Hybrid is about $13,000 more than a base non-hybrid version. Some of that is probably due to equipment differences, but the hybrid powertrain will still probably command a premium of a few grand.

     

    History has shown that no matter the price of options, the Wrangler still sells well..

    Agree the wrangler will still sell well.

    Was curious, so off to the Chrysler website to see what details were.

    Pacifica Limited has a $44,445 MSRP.

    Pacifica Limited Hybrid has a $45,545 MSRP

    I am expecting Jeep to keep the price tight like this too!

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Yup, and the Ford Bronco will have removable doors and roof as well, with the side mirrors attached to the a-pillar, unlike the Wrangler/Gladiola, which have the mirrors attached to the doors.  Ford has a better idea here.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites



    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
    Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

    Guest
    Add a comment...

    ×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

      Only 75 emoji are allowed.

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

    ×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • google-news-icon.png



  • Community Hive Community Hive

    Community Hive allows you to follow your favorite communities all in one place.

    Follow on Community Hive
  • google-news-icon.png

  • Subscribe to Cheers & Gears

    Cheers and Gears Logo

    Since 2001 we've brought you real content and honest opinions, not AI-generated stuff with no feeling or opinions influenced by the manufacturers.

    Please consider subscribing. Subscriptions can be as little as $1.75 a month, and a paid subscription drops most ads.*
     

    You can view subscription options here.

    *a very limited number of ads contain special coupon deals for our members and will show

  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • Those use cases will necessitate the purchase of something with a long range, like 300+. But even still, two hours at 11.5kW would put 50 - 70 miles of range back in the car. You might need to make one 10-minute DCFC stop if you had a really busy day, but otherwise, you could make it.
    • I can understand this, but then this is part of my daily life. With two kids with their own families and grandkids it is not uncommon for us to be out and about for the day, come home for a bit before heading out to help with the grandkids and their afterschool activities. Plus, with family that is living from both sides north and south of us, it would not be uncommon to drive 75 miles down south to deal with my wife's side of the family, see the nieces/nephews and then up north to my side to see folks and with both our parents in senior years with health issues, also moving back in forth. Course this is why Sun puts on about 15,000 miles a year on the SS. We all have different use cases.
    • That's all I'm worried about. I'm not going to spend a sht ton more money having a 19.2kW charger installed for the 1 day every 3 years I empty the battery, get home for 2 hours, and have to again drive enough that I couldn't make it back home...  
    • I could see settling on three charger rates, but definitely not one. A Bolt or Kia EV4 type vehicle simply does not need 19kW home charging.  It would be an excessive cost to retrofit a house and the number of buyers who actually use that rate would be pretty close to zero.  That would be like insisting that the Corolla has to have a 6.2 liter. It's excessive and doesn't fit the use case. Now, if we settled into 7.5kW, 11.5kW, and 19.4kW as a standard, that would probably achieve what you are proposing while still giving cost flexibility.  It would allow for entry-level EVs to get the lower cost / lower speed charger while allowing the larger vehicles or premium vehicles to have faster home charging.  For example, the EV6 could have a lower cost 7.5kW charger while the Genesis GV60 on the same platform could get the 11.5kW charger because it is a premium brand and higher cost vehicle.  Then any large EV with or near a 200kW battery could have the 19.4kW charger, but even then, unless it is a newly built house or a commercial fleet, it will still probably charge only at 11.5kW, as that's about the max that the vast majority of homes are wired to do.  Unless you're driving an EV with a 200kW battery to 10% every day, an 11.5kW charger can "fill" an EV to 80% overnight with room to spare, so most people (including me), won't want the extra expense of spending extra money just to say my EV charged faster while I slept.  Either way, it will be ready for me when I need to leave at 7 am.
    • @ccap41 @Drew Dowdell Thank you both, this is the kind of dialogue I feel the Auto buyers need to be made aware of and the various use cases in understanding as I feel most DO NOT really understand this and give into the FEAR Mongering of News Stories. While I still feel that everyone should have the same charging rate capabilities, I also understand both your points. I do feel that this will change electrical across the WORLD over time due to the need of charging.
  • Who's Online (See full list)

    • There are no registered users currently online
  • My Clubs

×
×
  • Create New...

Hey there, we noticed you're using an ad-blocker. We're a small site that is supported by ads or subscriptions. We rely on these to pay for server costs and vehicle reviews.  Please consider whitelisting us in your ad-blocker, or if you really like what you see, you can pick up one of our subscriptions for just $1.75 a month or $15 a year. It may not seem like a lot, but it goes a long way to help support real, honest content, that isn't generated by an AI bot.

See you out there.

Drew
Editor-in-Chief

Write what you are looking for and press enter or click the search icon to begin your search

Change privacy settings