Useful Tazer JL Feature?

[Fudster]

I don't know. I know mechanics here more than marketing (people feelings on the subject matter.)

That feature would be the ability to adjust the sensitivity of when ESS events terminate.

Why? Many people hate ESS: the wear and tear, the limited gas savings, the forced introduction, the design in the JL. Anyone reading here long enough has familiarity with stuff.

But some of you hate ESS' design in the JL more than ESS in theory.

And a fair share of such people have removed their ESS/Aux batteries and hopefully turned ESS off. We don't want the main/only battery in our JLs getting robbed of cranking power by keeping appliances powered while the vehicle's engine is off at a traffic light. That's what the ESS/Aux battery we yanked was for.

But what if you could have your cake and eat it too? What if you could adjust (up), say, the voltage at which ESS events terminate? Many vehicles run ESS on one battery. Stellantis probably choose the 2 battery solution in the JL realizing that so many owners run energy hungry after market appliances, that a one battery solution would involve ESS events that didn't last more than 2 seconds.

Then they went out a designed a crappy dissimilar sized parallel battery system to satisfy the EPA and keep costs down.

But at least a fair number of you aren't running aftermarket energy draws like lights and winches (I don't judge). What if you could yank your ESS battery, up the ESS time out voltage to say, 12.6 Volts, and run ESS on one battery safely, for "14 seconds" knowing you still have enough power in that battery for the crank because you're in control of the ESS voltage termination threshold.

It's just an idea. Probably not even that hard for Z Automotive to implement. Thoughts?

Sponsored

 

[Reinen]

The problem is the sudden high draw from the starter causing a brownout of the electronics. That's not predictable, especially given the propensity for modifications that a Jeep has. A battery can deteriorate in a way that provides adequate voltage under low draw but suddenly dips to unacceptable voltage levels with a large draw. That's what they're trying to prevent.

I agree the stock design isn't the best because ultimately they're using the wrong battery type for the electronics. This is where the real problem lies. AGM really hates powering constant low draw devices like modern electronics. Lithium batteries would be much more suited to that, but they're not suited to a starter. That's AGM's wheelhouse. But to have two isolated power sources would require a complete redesign of the electrical system. A pretty big deal. So I understand the bind the engineers are in.

I don't agree with the removal of the Aux battery. It's there for a reason, in spite of it being less than ideal.

 

[jludave]

What if you could yank your ESS battery, up the ESS time out voltage to say, 12.6 Volts, and run ESS on one battery safely, for "14 seconds" knowing you still have enough power in that battery for the crank because you're in control of the ESS voltage termination threshold.

It's just an idea. Probably not even that hard for Z Automotive to implement. Thoughts?

Why? If I remove the ESS battery, why would there be a need for ESS at all (running on one battery)?

I'll stick with using the Tazer to just disable ESS.

 

[Billkowski]

Question on updating your tire size with the Tazer, does it just correct the speedometer or does do it also alter the transmission change points?

 

[Fudster]

Why? If I remove the ESS battery, why would there be a need for ESS at all (running on one battery)?

I'll stick with using the Tazer to just disable ESS.

Hi David:

The thought here, whether or not you buy into it or not, that is removal of the ESS battery was motivated by the degree to which it makes the JL less reliable, but that you might have nothing against running ESS events against the main battery if you knew that it could never be depleted enough to not crank the engine upon ESS event conclusion.

You may hate ESS as much as the battery Stellantis designed to run it in the JL. If so--I completely respect that.

For some, it's the ESS battery, not the potential gas savings (small though they may be) from ESS events that is what causes them grief.

 

[Fudster]

The problem is the sudden high draw from the starter causing a brownout of the electronics. That's not predictable, especially given the propensity for modifications that a Jeep has. A battery can deteriorate in a way that provides adequate voltage under low draw but suddenly dips to unacceptable voltage levels with a large draw. That's what they're trying to prevent.

Fair, but for a pretty stock electronic drawing Wrangler, I'd question how other vehicles are doing ESS with one battery, but the Wrangler can't. It's those stock ones that the feature I describe might be useful for. Perhaps a larger battery (and/or alternator--which eats away at the very gasoline ESS is trying to save,) if only running one batttery, might be more ideal if also running ESS events on a stock-like JL..

We agree about the potential rapid loss of power on a Wrangler accessorized with power hungry appliances and the need to isolate a starter battery. We also agree that how this was designed leaves the owner wanted something better. But Stellantis was out to pass EPA guidelines, withourtraising base sticker price of the ESS tech more than necessary, knowing how its aftermarket and resourceful owners (e.g. trickle charging) will design solutions to their shortcomings should owners find them useful (read Genesis Offroad.)

I agree the stock design isn't the best because ultimately they're using the wrong battery type for the electronics. This is where the real problem lies. AGM really hates powering constant low draw devices like modern electronics. Lithium batteries would be much more suited to that, but they're not suited to a starter.

...nor temperatures below freezing.

That's AGM's wheelhouse. But to have two isolated power sources would require a complete redesign of the electrical system. A pretty big deal. So I understand the bind the engineers are in.

Yeah, agreed, two separate alternators for different battery chemistries, or a computer to regulate the power one alternator produces to each of these dissimilar batteries is an expensive solution to sell or repair.

I don't agree with the removal of the Aux battery. It's there for a reason, in spite of it being less than ideal.

I too have mine and trickle charge my Wrangler while parked. Where we may differ is I have no issues with owners disconnecting and/or removing their ESS batteries as long as the yturn ESS off, or a feature like the one I propose could be successfully implemented on non-appliance energy hungry accessorized Wranglers.

Sponsored