4xE Order Status??

[KarlN]

I appreciate the intelligent perspectives I am reading now. Shallow gender insults only let you know what's on the other side... If I were a woman on this site I would be appalled at prior responses. Like a woman is less of a person?

Sponsored

 

[GT2529]

As a current PHEV owner (2015 Chevy Volt), I wanted to give some of my perspective regarding concerns that the estimated range is not meeting the EPA range. The Volt was marketed by Chevy as getting 38 miles on a full charge, but when I got it new, I was getting 45-50 miles of range on a full chrage (depending on the weather, ambient temparature and my driving style). The reason for this is that engineers know that batteries get less efficient over time. Chevy calculated this, and figured that within 5 years, 38 miles per charge is what the battery would likely get after it became less efficient. They were right, after the first 3 years, I was rarely getting 40 anymore.

Actually last year, my car was parked in the heat during the lockdown and uncharged for awhile (since I normally charge at work), and it destroyed the battery, I was only getting no more than 28 miles of range. It was was under warranty and I got it replaced last fall with a brand new battery, and I’m back above 40. My point is that, the batteries on an EV will go down over time, and that needs to be factored in. Whether Jeep is saying it will be 25, could mean that it would actually get 20% more, such as 30 brand new, and it will go down to 25 over a few years, or it means it will be 25 brand new, and it will go down to 21 over time. We’ll have to find out as soon as someone gets one to see what it gets brand new.

The fact that other countries have rated differently could mean that they just have different standards for testing. Jeep still is stating on their site that the 4xe will get 25. Canada is colder, so they probably factor in that batteries will be less efficient So gave it a 21 rating.

Also, I’m thinking of the 4xe as being more of a hybrid that has a 25 mi range battery on all electric than an everyday EV driver. Even with 25 or 30 miles, that isn't enough to cover a day of driving in reality. You need to get to 40-50. We always drive more than we expect. The 4xe will be great for rolling into campsites silently at night, having options for silent driving, rolling anywhere where you want short drives with zero emissions. You can get out of the vehicle while running, and not smell exhaust. You get great low end torque and acceleration. Cruising around off-road silently when you want to appreciate the sounds of nature or wildlife - basically how Jeep is marketing the vehicle. They are not marketing it as an everyday EV driver, however. It will also be a full hybrid system, and you can regain power from regen braking, and the system will calculate when to use battery or gas for improved mpg. I’m more interested in seeing the gas only MPG numbers from the EPA.

Let’s all hope though that it gets as much range as possible on the battery, 25-30 brand new!

 

[HungryHound]

According to CA Jeep site, the range dropped to 21 mile from 25 (https://www.jeep.ca/en/wrangler-4xe).

"If you’re planning a long drive, electric power alone will last up to 34 km,* and for longer adventures, hybrid will take you up to 595 km* − giving you all the freedom while eliminating range anxiety." This translates to 21.1 mile electric range and 369 mile in total.

Too bad that the Tesla can go above 369 purely electric. 21 mile is not too much, doesn't worth the almost the hassle to charge it, so I will end up with few hundred extra pounds for the same 2.0T engine and even worse MPG.

I will wait for what the final figures will be before saying "too bad that I've placed my order for the Yellow 4xe Rubicon".

According to the German site (https://www.jeep.de/4xe-hybrid/wrangler-4xe) it will have 31 mi using EU calculations...

I usually have to pee before 369 miles so the range doesn't bother me too much. The reduction in electric mode bothers me a little, but the huge disappointment is the drop in torque and horsepower. Hopefully, the Tazer Mini will be able to address this de-tuning.

 

[HungryHound]

Did you all notice the German site has an audio comparison of the sound of the electric vs ICE? Whooooosh!

I didn't see where you could launch a video, but my German is very rusty. I did notice they showed a WW2 Willys. Didn't the Germans lose that war?

 

[HungryHound]

You're missing the point entirely. Nobody is complaining that the 4xe doesn't live up to the claimed mileage. Nobody even has a 4xe in their possession in order to verify that. The frustration stems from the fact that some revised numbers trickling out seem to be significantly lower than the initial "estimates", to the point where it feels a little like foul play.

That said, it is a little too early to be in a state of full-blown outrage over this, as nothing is yet final and we may very well be looking at numbers that only apply to other regions. But if the new, less-impressive numbers do in fact apply to US orders as well, people would have every right to feel a bit bait-and-switch'd. Where one draws the line between estimation error versus "holy crap, I was swindled" is their own prerogative.

For a little thought experiment, we can contrive a couple examples. In the first, let's say the final numbers come in with a grand total reduction of exactly ONE horsepower and ONE lb-ft of torque; in this case, I think all of us (or at least the vast majority) would comfortably accept that there was a small error in measurement or estimation. In the second example, let's say the final numbers show a massive 80% reduction in horsepower and torque; in this case, I'd be surprised if there was a single person who didn't feel tricked. The reality is somewhere in-between, with numbers coming out showing a reduction of 25 horsepower, 28 lb-ft of torque, 1kWh of capacity, 4 miles of all-electric range, and 30 miles of total range. Again, these numbers are likely not final (at least for us American folks), but if they are, it wouldn't be wrong for somebody to say that's uncomfortably close to the holy-crap-I-was-swindled side of the spectrum, even if it feels like a no-big-deal type of change to you. The world isn't so black and white, in fact most of it is filled with grey area.

Based on some posts on this forum, I gotta assume there's moles on here from both Stella and Ford.

 

[HungryHound]

Accusations that Jeep deliberately tried to deceive have no evidence to support that claim. Why would they even do that? Like it’s not eventually going to come out. It’s almost certain that the estimated specs they published were based on certain driving conditions and performance of the components in the vehicle. The variation in the original estimates could be do to different driving assumptions by the regulating bodies or variation in component performance that is not often seen until a larger number of units are built.

As someone who has been in the business of developing and manufacturing complex scientific instruments for more than 30 years, transitioning from a pre production pilot run to full blown production almost always uncovers some unexpected issues. We all have come to expect that everything just works as advertised. But, most don’t understand how difficult it is to make that happen.

Jeep is building a vehicle designed to do what no other vehicle has done before. Maintain the industry leading off road capability and improve fuel efficiency, particular in use as a daily driver, and improve all around performance, all at the same time.

Yes, ev technology has been in use for some time in other vehicles. But in vehicles designed for the road. Not a vehicle that has the off road go anywhere capability of a Jeep Wrangler.

I agree. I think it's an EPA vs Jeep testing specs. situation. DCX, or Stella now, has a wind tunnel at CTC in Auburn Hills. This can't be the first time they've stuck this brick in for testing. Maybe the EPA test is different or has changed now that more EVs are hitting the market.

 

[AaronTV]

Accusations that Jeep deliberately tried to deceive have no evidence to support that claim. Why would they even do that? Like it’s not eventually going to come out. It’s almost certain that the estimated specs they published were based on certain driving conditions and performance of the components in the vehicle. The variation in the original estimates could be do to different driving assumptions by the regulating bodies or variation in component performance that is not often seen until a larger number of units are built.

As someone who has been in the business of developing and manufacturing complex scientific instruments for more than 30 years, transitioning from a pre production pilot run to full blown production almost always uncovers some unexpected issues. We all have come to expect that everything just works as advertised. But, most don’t understand how difficult it is to make that happen.

Jeep is building a vehicle designed to do what no other vehicle has done before. Maintain the industry leading off road capability and improve fuel efficiency, particular in use as a daily driver, and improve all around performance, all at the same time.

Yes, ev technology has been in use for some time in other vehicles. But in vehicles designed for the road. Not a vehicle that has the off road go anywhere capability of a Jeep Wrangler.

If the US numbers end up being the same as those Canadian ones, I'd say it is deliberate deception. Why? Because the US site still lists 375 hp/470 lb ft torque & 25/400 mile ranges. If people are placing orders based on those advertised specs (they obviously are) and Jeep knows those specs aren't accurate, then they are deliberately deceiving people.

How an individual buyer should react to that is up to them.

However, we don't have any evidence that US spec 4xes will be anything other than advertised. Conjecture based on that Canadian site is just that... Conjecture.

 

[Oneilc01]

I didn't see where you could launch a video, but my German is very rusty. I did notice they showed a WW2 Willys. Didn't the Germans lose that war?

 

[jdeolivares]

I an not trying to argue that one shouldn't feel some disappointment that spec appears to be less than the initial estimated spec. Only that there is no evidence of a deliberate attempt to deceive at this point.

 

[greensprit]

There is also a difference between deception and just errors due to processes. I suspect the latter. My guess is the marketing teams that control the websites are just behind on any updates. The fact that they have different data in different sections of the website and brochures just means they don't have good data controls and processes to keep things updated; with all the cost cuts that are going on and the merger, they probably can't stay on top of things. So while it seems like they're intentionally being deceptive, my guess it's it's just an unintentional byproduct of poor process and org management. (which is it's own issue in itself).

 

[dudemind]

I an not trying to argue that one shouldn't feel some disappointment that spec appears to be less than the initial estimated spec. Only that there is no evidence of a deliberate attempt to deceive at this point.

That's fair, and frankly there may never be. There will always be the possibility that Jeep's engineers were that bad at estimating/projecting their numbers early on. But everybody does have some cutoff where they would stop giving the benefit of the doubt. It's not unreasonable that some are already there.

Once again, I state like a broken record: that's IF the Canadian numbers do apply to US as well. My fingers are crossed that 375hp/470lb-ft still do stand.

 

[Mcwilldo]

I just spoke with Jeep. They stated that the 4Xe has 375hp and 470 torque. In addition they stated the battery is 400 Volt - 17kWh. Perhaps there was a typo on the US website.

 

[dudemind]

There is also a difference between deception and just errors due to processes. I suspect the latter. My guess is the marketing teams that control the websites are just behind on any updates. The fact that they have different data in different sections of the website and brochures just means they don't have good data controls and processes to keep things updated; with all the cost cuts that are going on and the merger, they probably can't stay on top of things. So while it seems like they're intentionally being deceptive, my guess it's it's just an unintentional byproduct of poor process and org management. (which is it's own issue in itself).

I can see that happening. The engineering team tests a number of these powertrains and passes up a report stating that their testing shows "350hp with a 25hp margin of error at a 95% confidence interval", then some marketing guy with no understanding of statistics says, "Okay so we're 95% confident we can get to 375 horsepower? Publish it."

I work in investment finance and this type of miscommunication happens a lot between our quants and our marketing dept.

 

[jdeolivares]

I can see that happening. The engineering team tests a number of these powertrains and passes up a report stating that their testing shows "350hp with a 25hp margin of error at a 95% confidence interval", then some marketing guy with no understanding of statistics says, "Okay so we're 95% confident we can get to 375 horsepower? Publish it."

I work in investment finance and this type of miscommunication happens a lot between our quants and our marketing dept.

I agree that is also a very real possibility and have experienced that as well. Regardless of the reasons for the changing published specs, organizationally these types of errors should be avoided because they do cause loss of credibility and product satisfaction by consumers.

 

[PyrPatriot]

I appreciate the intelligent perspectives I am reading now. Shallow gender insults only let you know what's on the other side... If I were a woman on this site I would be appalled at prior responses. Like a woman is less of a person?

Appalled? Grow some thicker skin. I have 4 sisters, a wife, and daughter, and my mom's still around. None are ashamed to admit they dont have an interest in cars, and have always left it to "the men". It is a fact of life that as a whole women dont know as much about cars, or even show as much interest, as men. The trend is now where men are showing less interest and women more, but we're not there yet where the historical precedence and numbers can be ignored. I wouldnt be appalled at someone assuming I am disinclined in vehicle operation and repair just because of my young age, the fact is fewer people are interested in understanding their vehicles. The commentary isn't anything to get your knickers in a bunch over. People were trying to bring levity to the situation.

Now, back on topic;

I have already started gauging interest in trading in my JT or to lease a 4xe wrangler for the wife. Im really liking the idea of it as a commuter vehicle for my worm and grocery getter for her. But if it's just 20-25mi, I would probably pass until they get up to near 50mi real world

Sponsored