Jeep Wrangler 4xe Hybrid Revealed With 50 MPG-E, 375 Horsepower/470 LB-FT Torque!

[Toycrusher]

in regards to the 25 mi estimated range, I read today that the Rubicon 4xe ran the 22 mile rubicon trail all in EV mode.

https://www.greencarreports.com/new...ild-solar-powered-chargers-on-off-road-trails

I'm calling baloney. The physics are impossible. Sure a 4xe probably crossed the Rubicon, but not on electric power alone. Didn't happen. Fake news

Sponsored

 

[Oilburner]

I'm calling baloney. The physics are impossible. Sure a 4xe probably crossed the Rubicon, but not on electric power alone. Didn't happen. Fake news

Then Jeep is not telling the truth (2nd paragraph)
https://www.jlwranglerforums.com/fo...icon-trail-for-new-hybrid-wrangler-4xe.57904/

 

[Windshieldfarmer]

I'm calling baloney. The physics are impossible. Sure a 4xe probably crossed the Rubicon, but not on electric power alone. Didn't happen. Fake news

120 feet incline is nothing at slow speed. There is no wind resistance when off roading. At slow speeds my Tesla uses very little juice - it vastly exceeds the rated range when driving slow. I think it’s doable...

 

[Toycrusher]

Then Jeep is not telling the truth (2nd paragraph)
https://www.jlwranglerforums.com/fo...icon-trail-for-new-hybrid-wrangler-4xe.57904/

As others pointed out, there are some holes in that press release. 2 hr charge time? Solar charging? Just how massive are those panels? It would take a pretty impressive panel array days to store up 17kw. What if another Jeep gets there before you and takes it all?

 

[Bren]

As others pointed out, there are some holes in that press release. 2 hr charge time? Solar charging? Just how massive are those panels? It would take a pretty impressive panel array days to store up 17kw. What if another Jeep gets there before you and takes it all?

Not saying they did, but if Jeep really wanted to fudge this, there's an easy way.

EVs (including PHEV) don't use all of their battery capacity. Batteries are happiest and last longest when they cycle in the middle of their capacities (charging them when they're at ~15% up to only ~85%). So manufacturers build this headroom into the software of the car. When you see 0% on your dash, your battery isn't dead - it just goes into a power save mode because it would be very bad to let a Lithium Ion battery die completely.

So let's say you want to run the Rubicon trail and are a few miles short, and you also have access to factory software settings. Unlock some of that buffer capacity and I have no doubt this thing would make it the whole way.

Tesla actually does a bit of this, unlocking this capacity when there is a natural disaster (impending hurricane, for example) so owners have max juice to evac and not clog up the chargers.

There's another way, too. It's possible the Wrangler can go farther than 25 miles? They might be taking the conservative approach here, and giving a range that's not the maximum. They may have made a marketing calculation that Jeep people won't really tolerate it when they buy a rig with "25 miles" and it consistently gets less. The only way to satisfy is to under-promise and over-deliver. That would make sense, too. They don't have to win the range game here, they are alone in their segment of electrified convertible off-roaders until Bronco announced their PHEV. All this meaning out on he Rubicon, it might do considerably better than 25 miles. That would be a delightful development. I'm not optimistic but hold out some hope.

 

[RubiTuesday]

Not saying they did, but if Jeep really wanted to fudge this, there's an easy way.

EVs (including PHEV) don't use all of their battery capacity. Batteries are happiest and last longest when they cycle in the middle of their capacities (charging them when they're at ~15% up to only ~85%). So manufacturers build this headroom into the software of the car. When you see 0% on your dash, your battery isn't dead - it just goes into a power save mode because it would be very bad to let a Lithium Ion battery die completely.

So let's say you want to run the Rubicon trail and are a few miles short, and you also have access to factory software settings. Unlock some of that buffer capacity and I have no doubt this thing would make it the whole way.

Tesla actually does a bit of this, unlocking this capacity when there is a natural disaster (impending hurricane, for example) so owners have max juice to evac and not clog up the chargers.

Interesting point. Additionally, we don't know how close to a true 100% charge a normal charge on the 4xe will be. As you correctly point out, most Tesla owners routinely charge to somewhere around 85% because it's better for the long term health of the battery. To my knowledge, the 4xe has no (easy/systemic) way for the end user to control how much they want to charge the battery each time they plug in. Perhaps FCA has dumbed things down for its users and when the 4xe battery says 100%, it's really 85%. And if that is the case, they could have also "cheated" on the top side, by using their access to the factory software and giving a true 100% charge.

 

[Bren]

Interesting point. Additionally, we don't know how close to a true 100% charge a normal charge on the 4xe will be. As you correctly point out, most Tesla owners routinely charge to somewhere around 85% because it's better for the long term health of the battery. To my knowledge, the 4xe has no (easy/systemic) way for the end user to control how much they want to charge the battery each time they plug in. Perhaps FCA has dumbed things down for its users and when the 4xe battery says 100%, it's really 85%. And if that is the case, they could have also "cheated" on the top side, by using their access to the factory software and giving a true 100% charge.

Exactly. The more I think about it the more I think the 2nd scenario I laid out is more likely (conservative range estimate), because plenty of people will run the Rubicon on stock settings and if they can't make it, the community will cry foul. Porsche Taycan seemingly under-promised and over-delivered on their range too, and their buyers are similar in that they're not terrible familiar with the ways EVs work and would be frustrated with range loss due to environmental factors. So why not quote range on the low end and then everyone is happy.

I do still think they have a buffer built in, that to me is a no-brainer here. Most EVs do that, Tesla is the only outlier (They have a buffer too but it's smaller). I'm just starting to think it's less likely they tapped into it for this.

We'll have to see when these things start hitting the road if people are reporting 30-35 miles possible in temperate air and flat ground. That would be awesome. Might even get 40 with the doors off.

 

[summer4x]

I think it's perfect timing for me to have ordered the standard 2.0 engine. I can drive it for 2 or 3 years and see how I really feel about it, watching how the hybrid does and allowing any bugs to be worked out. If it looks like a winner, I may go that route in the future.

 

[four low]

I have the 2.0T, with E Torque, 17,000 trouble free miles.
This is the " bridge vehicle " for the PHEV, and I'm looking forward to the all- electric version. Future can't come fast enough!

 

[ODDs]

I think it's perfect timing for me to have ordered the standard 2.0 engine. I can drive it for 2 or 3 years and see how I really feel about it, watching how the hybrid does and allowing any bugs to be worked out. If it looks like a winner, I may go that route in the future.

However, the $7500 tax credits might be used up by then.

 

[Blade1668]

Not saying they did, but if Jeep really wanted to fudge this, there's an easy way.

EVs (including PHEV) don't use all of their battery capacity. Batteries are happiest and last longest when they cycle in the middle of their capacities (charging them when they're at ~15% up to only ~85%). So manufacturers build this headroom into the software of the car. When you see 0% on your dash, your battery isn't dead - it just goes into a power save mode because it would be very bad to let a Lithium Ion battery die completely.

So let's say you want to run the Rubicon trail and are a few miles short, and you also have access to factory software settings. Unlock some of that buffer capacity and I have no doubt this thing would make it the whole way.

Tesla actually does a bit of this, unlocking this capacity when there is a natural disaster (impending hurricane, for example) so owners have max juice to evac and not clog up the chargers.

There's another way, too. It's possible the Wrangler can go farther than 25 miles? They might be taking the conservative approach here, and giving a range that's not the maximum. They may have made a marketing calculation that Jeep people won't really tolerate it when they buy a rig with "25 miles" and it consistently gets less. The only way to satisfy is to under-promise and over-deliver. That would make sense, too. They don't have to win the range game here, they are alone in their segment of electrified convertible off-roaders until Bronco announced their PHEV. All this meaning out on he Rubicon, it might do considerably better than 25 miles. That would be a delightful development. I'm not optimistic but hold out some hope.

Hmmm so by July 2021 the newly improved Taser mini xe starts sales for tapping into that bottom end of battery power.

On to more of my thoughts on it.
# 1. This is likely to be Jeep #8 for me down the road a few years. But needs slightly longer range in EV mode: 115 miles to and from work. Half at HWY / I-State speeds.
# 2. I had myself on the list for a EV truck that is still vapor ware really. I expected it to be stupid money for it, but the actual list price is not a working or reasonable amount (Around 3 times plus o EV/Hybrid Wrangler expected cost). Cost vs MPG of my current Jeep. At the time 05 LJ, I got just short 250000 miles on the clutch" or really any heavy maintenance required. I thought about buying a used LJ or other Jeep. The vehicle would have to be in service for way past 25 years to think about it being cost effective. I'd be 75-85 before even thinking about seeing it be cost effective. Part 2 of that power consumption from my electric account would still cost me more. AKA over charged for electric at my land and wouldn't be able to supplement with solar.
#3 The JT is out, available and checks most boxes.... I'm 7 months in with my JT, about 3 weeks after clutch replacement in LJ I pulled the trigger on it. My LJ been running hard for 1/4 million miles plus.... Now about Jeep's reliability?
#3 part B:
If I get to a certain point I might try to do a "EV" conversion to my XJ or MJ. It would be for putting around near home area, there has been a few home built EV pickup's and XJ's already. But I've got enough projects and hobbies already.
I've been quite happy with it's performance, MPG, ride, range, capability's.
#4 currently it's looking to be capable of stomping the new Bronco a new one right out of the gate in power and off-roading capability.
Another interesting thing is about 20 years ago a 4 wheel mag did a simple EV conversion to a 4×4 and compared it with a same make and model. They was using standard 12 v batteries with Honda generator and battery charger's to recharge them. If I'm not mistaking it's performance was as good if not better in many ways with in the limited testing.

 

[Bren]

Hmmm so by July 2021 the newly improved Taser mini xe starts sales for tapping into that bottom end of battery power.

On to more of my thoughts on it.
# 1. This is likely to be Jeep #8 for me down the road a few years. But needs slightly longer range in EV mode: 115 miles to and from work. Half at HWY / I-State speeds.
# 2. I had myself on the list for a EV truck that is still vapor ware really. I expected it to be stupid money for it, but the actual list price is not a working or reasonable amount (Around 3 times plus o EV/Hybrid Wrangler expected cost). Cost vs MPG of my current Jeep. At the time 05 LJ, I got just short 250000 miles on the clutch" or really any heavy maintenance required. I thought about buying a used LJ or other Jeep. The vehicle would have to be in service for way past 25 years to think about it being cost effective. I'd be 75-85 before even thinking about seeing it be cost effective. Part 2 of that power consumption from my electric account would still cost me more. AKA over charged for electric at my land and wouldn't be able to supplement with solar.
#3 The JT is out, available and checks most boxes.... I'm 7 months in with my JT, about 3 weeks after clutch replacement in LJ I pulled the trigger on it. My LJ been running hard for 1/4 million miles plus.... Now about Jeep's reliability?
#3 part B:
If I get to a certain point I might try to do a "EV" conversion to my XJ or MJ. It would be for putting around near home area, there has been a few home built EV pickup's and XJ's already. But I've got enough projects and hobbies already.
I've been quite happy with it's performance, MPG, ride, range, capability's.
#4 currently it's looking to be capable of stomping the new Bronco a new one right out of the gate in power and off-roading capability.
Another interesting thing is about 20 years ago a 4 wheel mag did a simple EV conversion to a 4×4 and compared it with a same make and model. They was using standard 12 v batteries with Honda generator and battery charger's to recharge them. If I'm not mistaking it's performance was as good if not better in many ways with in the limited testing.

Trying to think which EV truck would offer a presale list and cost 3x the Wrangler. Bollinger?

Bollinger is selling a rolling EV chassis now, might be a good starting point for something, although I haven't seen the cost and I'm sure it's eye-watering.

 

[crash13]

I think I need a better explanation of 50mpg-E.
" MPGe rating is calculated by figuring out the number of miles a vehicle can go using the same energy content as a gallon of gas. The EPA calculates that 33.7 kilowatt-hours of electricity is the equivalent to one gallon of gas"
Obviously it does not get 50mpg indefinitely, and theoretically it gets infinite mpg in full electric mode

 

[RubiTuesday]

I think I need a better explanation of 50mpg-E.
" MPGe rating is calculated by figuring out the number of miles a vehicle can go using the same energy content as a gallon of gas. The EPA calculates that 33.7 kilowatt-hours of electricity is the equivalent to one gallon of gas"
Obviously it does not get 50mpg indefinitely, and theoretically it gets infinite mpg in full electric mode

First, it doesn't get 50MPG. It does get 50MPGe. That "e" stands for equivalent, as in "miles per gallon of gasoline-equivalent." This seems like a nit-pick, but it's important. MPGe is an attempt to measure the efficiency of an electric car in a similar way to how we measure the efficiency of an ICE car using gallons of gas. So the EPA says that a gallon of gas is equivalent to 33.7kWh of energy. If we look at how many miles per 33.7kWh of energy an electric car (or in this case a PHEV in electric mode) can go, we get miles/33.7kWh or the more palatable MPGe.

The 50MPGe is applicable when the 4xe is running off the battery in electric only mode. FCA has stated a 25 mile range in electric only mode. The 4xe battery has 17kWh. Math time:

17 / 33.7 = 0.5. So the 4xe battery has the equivalent of 0.5 gallons of gas in energy.

25 miles of range / 0.5 gallons = 50 MPGe.

Edit: This math probably a bit simplistic. See this post for additional considerations

Sponsored