What's the hold up? Let's speculate...

[greensprit]

Seems like many 4xes are now built and sitting in storage - including mine. No one can seem to get a straight answer on what's going on.

Here's what we do know...
1) EPA still has not posted MPG for the 4xe on their site (https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Pow...del=Wrangler&srchtyp=ymm&pageno=1&rowLimit=50)
2) As a result, window stickers can't be produced and cars can't be delivered
3) 4xe was supposed to arrive at the end of december

So based on that, here's a hypothesis:
1) EPA did their initial MPG rating on the 4xe, but Jeep was not happy with the result - and given how important this launch is for them, they need to figure out how to get as close as possible to the 50 mpge that they've been marketing
2) Jeep is now making changes to the software to try and improve the EPA test results
3) Once software is updated, EPA tests and Jeep is happy, then all cars in storage will be updated with new software and then will be shipped
4) Why is it taking so long? I bet Jeep engineers and ZF engineers are fighting over how to improve their numbers and their software CI/CD process is likely not agile

Could be in for a long wait... or short, who knows...

Other ideas?

Sponsored

 

[rykart]

Ben Hardy has some thoughts on pre-orders.

 

[ElHobbz]

Seems like many 4xes are now built and sitting in storage - including mine. No one can seem to get a straight answer on what's going on.

Here's what we do know...
1) EPA still has not posted MPG for the 4xe on their site (https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Pow...del=Wrangler&srchtyp=ymm&pageno=1&rowLimit=50)
2) As a result, window stickers can't be produced and cars can't be delivered
3) 4xe was supposed to arrive at the end of december

So based on that, here's a hypothesis:
1) EPA did their initial MPG rating on the 4xe, but Jeep was not happy with the result - and given how important this launch is for them, they need to figure out how to get as close as possible to the 50 mpge that they've been marketing
2) Jeep is now making changes to the software to try and improve the EPA test results
3) Once software is updated, EPA tests and Jeep is happy, then all cars in storage will be updated with new software and then will be shipped
4) Why is it taking so long? I bet Jeep engineers and ZF engineers are fighting over how to improve their numbers and their software CI/CD process is likely not agile

Could be in for a long wait... or short, who knows...

Other ideas?

#WATERFALL

 

[JimLee]

Ford has stopped production of F150's due to world wide semi conductor shortage...

 

[KaiyaKai]

Could this be a good sign? A Rubicon cyptosticker with both build and sticker found:

https://cryptostickers.net/default?nick=beaso11

 

[greensprit]

Good catch! First one I've seen. Hopefully a good sign and not a bug. Still no posting from EPA and I don't see any other 4xes showing with stickers yet; but i'll remain optimistic.

 

[orejo]

I will go with a theory that they want to get both Rubicons and Saharas on dealer lots at the same time, but their infrastructure for building them mean they had to do one build type at a time. They finished a batch of Rubicons and are working through a batch of Saharas now (including mine, build found - no sticker) and I suspect they will do a huge batch shipment toward the end of the month.

I also suspect that they were monitoring orders for them since orders opened in November and the numbers have been healthy enough that they are holding off advertising until there is inventory on dealer lots, or not healthy enough for them to keep pushing it without them available to test drive.

 

[Glamisfan]

Three years ago when the first 2.0 mild hybrids were made, they were put in storage for a few months. While they were in storage some of them spontaneously combusted. This caused Jeep to re-engineer a heat shield underneath that was supposed to prevent the problem. My guess is these things are in storage so they see if they catch on fire or not?

 

[greensprit]

@orejo; I hope your theory is right. Still curious that the EPA has not released MPG ratings on it yet... especially considering that the EPA has released their figures on the 392, which has always been scheduled behind the 4xe.

 

[KSpider]

Good catch! First one I've seen. Hopefully a good sign and not a bug. Still no posting from EPA and I don't see any other 4xes showing with stickers yet; but i'll remain optimistic.

I have seen a 4xe here and there with a sticker on crypto, but until one of those people actually post their sticker I wont put much money behind it.

 

[dudemind]

EPA did their initial MPG rating on the 4xe, but Jeep was not happy with the result - and given how important this launch is for them, they need to figure out how to get as close as possible to the 50 mpge that they've been marketing

This may very well be a possibility, but looking at the fiasco between Porsche and the EPA with regards to the Taycan, I'm not so sure that this is what's going on. In that scenario, Porsche seemed as shocked as the rest of the automotive world when EPA's figures came in well under their own estimates -- so much so that they publicly refuted the results and hired their own independent testers to prove that they were right. It's totally possible that there were some behind-the-scenes politics that Porsche didn't play quite right and Jeep did, but it seemed that Porsche didn't get much of a heads up, if any. In the end, they ended up voluntarily lowering their range estimates to better fall in line with the EPA's official numbers.

Again, maybe Jeep's got some kind of inside scoop on their own figures and is fighting some kind of behind-the-scenes legal/political battle to publicly save face. And it's as good a theory as any at this point. Any speculative discussion is a great distraction to keep me from politely harassing Jeep Chat several times a day.

For what it's worth (i.e., not much), if the official results do come in significantly worse than "estimated", I'll very likely be canceling my order.

 

[jeepoch]

All,

I have no direct relevant information to contribute in this particular situation, but working as a Powertrain Software Engineer for Chrysler in a prior life I can provide a few ideas.

First, the primary reason to quarantine vehicles between the factory and dealership is indeed some issue that will legally prevent their sale. Either a safety problem but more typically an emissions certification shortcoming. The government will not allow the vehicle to leave the factory until that particular model meets EPA regulations.

Management will typically not stop production if they feel that certification is near. They'll hire a cadre of technicians to then perform what we termed a 'flash bash' to reprogram all the affected vehicle's Engine Controllers with the new certified emission calibrations.

Second, sequestering vehicles is a big deal. The corporation can't release each asset from their books until the vehicle is shipped. Technically a corporate owned holding company buys (or rather takes ownership) of these vehicles while they are in transit to their destination dealership. The dealership can either buy each unit outright (with a volume discount) or simply hold each unit on consignment until it's sold. Clearly the dealership potentially makes a higher profit margin on units they bought at a discount rather than just receiving the equivalent of a small brokerage fee from the holding company on anything else.

However, no monies change hands (even virtually) until the units are either delivered or sold at the dealership. So just the taxes on asset value while in the holding lots accrues daily. This cost is typically offset by transportation charges, but not always. You can bet that if these vehicles sit for some amount of time, there will be little to no incentive for either discounts or negotiation anywhere. Corporate will need to recoup their taxation charges. It's us consumers that will always pay the corporate taxes (ALWAYS). No matter how they try to hide them.

Still, holding vehicles in quarantine places hardship on every sales channel. They'll do anything (I mean anything) in order to move sequestered vehicles.

It must be a very good reason to hold these 4xe's. It's either 2.0L emission disqualification, battery problems or some other technical issue preventing their sale. If it was simply PR or model inventory coordination, my bet is that they'd never hold these units for this length of time.

Jay

 

[JustinWPI11]

Since your asking for speculation... my guess is it has something to do with supply chain limitations. The Jeep Renegade 4xe is being produced in Italy and they have halted production at that plant due to limited semi conductor chips. In general Covid has really put a strain on supply chains for manufacturing in all industries.

 

[oceanblue2019]

Worldwide supply of MOSFET's has become very challenging. These are used in power controllers of all types. I would expect a EV to have a very high dependence on these sorts of parts.

Perhaps the vehicles in storage are missing a couple electronic assemblies waiting on parts availability?

The challenge is this is not expected to sort itself out until late 2021. This is causing shortages in all sorts of products.

 

[CodyDog]

Since your asking for speculation... my guess is it has something to do with supply chain limitations. The Jeep Renegade 4xe is being produced in Italy and they have halted production at that plant due to limited semi conductor chips. In general Covid has really put a strain on supply chains for manufacturing in all industries.

I hope its the EPA hold up versus parts. The wait on parts being delayed worldwide could add months to the delay.

Sponsored