Latest from HPA on their diesel conversion kit
- Thread starter Calin.Macrinici
- Start date
X-plorenow
Adventurer
Thanks, hadn't seen this. It is very exciting, except I am more concerned at this point about what the EPA has to say here in the US. What are the legalities of a swap like this in Canada?
Calin.Macrinici
Observer
Tell you the truth, no idea! An email to HPA would probably yield some info, although (same as in the States) it varies by province. They are in BC, which is probably more California-like than other provinces, so if they managed to get their YJ prototype on the road (I'm not saying they did, all their photos/videos are off-road or at a show) it's probably doable everywhere else, too.
jeepdreamer
Expedition Leader
It does look like a lot of effort was put into making this kit. Is it cheap, no. But that I can understand. My only concern would be finding an appropriate VW motor for it.
postalWagon
Adventurer
Not hard to find a good vw engine, all you have to do is find your local vw club. Just wish they made a kit for automatic transmissions ....
reece146
Automotive Artist
Even with the cooked hp/tq numbers this engine doesn't sound like enough to power a built Jeep.
Cooked it is 115hp, 230 lb-ft... Now add a set of 35" tires, aero qualities of a barn door, ~4500 lb curb weight, 110-120 km/h cruise... Seems like not enough engine to me but I'd like to be proven wrong.
That's compared to 190 hp, 225 lb-ft from the stock 4.0 which is "adequate" in a built Jeep.
In order to spend that much money on one of these kits it would make sense to get a lot more engine. The improvement in mpg is not enough to justify the difference in building cost IMO. You can pay for a lot of differential between gas and diesel prices for many years, potentially a few engine rebuilds in order to break even.
If the engine was pushing 300+ lb-ft it would be more interesting.
2¢
Cooked it is 115hp, 230 lb-ft... Now add a set of 35" tires, aero qualities of a barn door, ~4500 lb curb weight, 110-120 km/h cruise... Seems like not enough engine to me but I'd like to be proven wrong.
That's compared to 190 hp, 225 lb-ft from the stock 4.0 which is "adequate" in a built Jeep.
In order to spend that much money on one of these kits it would make sense to get a lot more engine. The improvement in mpg is not enough to justify the difference in building cost IMO. You can pay for a lot of differential between gas and diesel prices for many years, potentially a few engine rebuilds in order to break even.
If the engine was pushing 300+ lb-ft it would be more interesting.
2¢
Calin.Macrinici
Observer
Not sure about the numbers. You have to remember that the engine (as per HPA) is 55 lb lighter than a Jeep 2.5 engine, quite a bit more compared to a 4.0 (though no dispute about the aerodynamics of a Jeep
. Also, you are right, I am not sure how suitable this would be for a Jeep (rock crawler?) on 35" tires, though for a 31"-33" long range expedition vehicle it might (same kind of vehicle where the hp and lb/ft are important in a different way). More so, in their 2010 Sema presentation of their TDI YJ they quoted 190hp and 289 lb/ft. If that is true (big if) those figures go way past "cooked" and approach "well done", don't you think? Money wise your total is somewhere around $5,800 plus the engine, where YMMV. If you can do the wiring harness yourself that drops to just above $4,000. Not cheap and indeed quite hard to recoup the money from fuel costs. But they are pushing 300 lb/ft
reece146
Automotive Artist
FWIW my Cherokee is built (locked both ends, armour, long arms, ~4.5" lift) and rides on 32" tires and weighs ~4150. It's built more overlanding style than rock crawler. I'd have serious reservations about spending that kind of money on an engine that wasn't more of an upgrade. The difference of 55 lbs between the engines is nothing in the grand scheme of things where a truck is concerned. I think my winch cable weighs more than that.
Their SEMA engine power and torque numbers sound like a stressed engine with much more boost than the engine was ever designed to deal with. Is it going to deal with hauling a 3000 lb trailer day in and day out while touring? Will it deal with heat soak crawling around unmaintained back roads all day long?
I don't know but I stick to my original comments. IMO 1.9 litres is not enough engine for a built Jeep.
Their SEMA engine power and torque numbers sound like a stressed engine with much more boost than the engine was ever designed to deal with. Is it going to deal with hauling a 3000 lb trailer day in and day out while touring? Will it deal with heat soak crawling around unmaintained back roads all day long?
I don't know but I stick to my original comments. IMO 1.9 litres is not enough engine for a built Jeep.
Dan Grec
Expedition Leader
I drove a 2.5 ltr TJ 40,000mi top to bottom on the Pan-Am.
That little engine was 120 hp and 140 ft. lbs. It was fantastic for my drive, I never had a single problem, even up at 16,000+ feet. Obviously it was not a speed monster, and I had to gear down to climb hills often, but I was very happy to get 20MPG day-in, day-out which gave a range of 375mi.
So this VW Diesel has almost identical hp, and 100 ft. lbs. more torque. I'll bet it's much better at climbing hills with that torque, and even if it gets 25MPG (conservative I think) that's a range of 475mi and I would have used about 400 gallons less diesel. Not to mention in a lot of countries, diesel was half price or less compared to gasoline.
At 30MPG, we're looking at 700 less gallons of diesel than the 2.5, and a range of 570mi.
Of course it depends on your use, but for what I did, I think you can see it's a good choice if you have a TJ in need of a new/rebuilt engine.
-Dan
That little engine was 120 hp and 140 ft. lbs. It was fantastic for my drive, I never had a single problem, even up at 16,000+ feet. Obviously it was not a speed monster, and I had to gear down to climb hills often, but I was very happy to get 20MPG day-in, day-out which gave a range of 375mi.
So this VW Diesel has almost identical hp, and 100 ft. lbs. more torque. I'll bet it's much better at climbing hills with that torque, and even if it gets 25MPG (conservative I think) that's a range of 475mi and I would have used about 400 gallons less diesel. Not to mention in a lot of countries, diesel was half price or less compared to gasoline.
At 30MPG, we're looking at 700 less gallons of diesel than the 2.5, and a range of 570mi.
Of course it depends on your use, but for what I did, I think you can see it's a good choice if you have a TJ in need of a new/rebuilt engine.
-Dan
Last edited:
Grecy is right on the button with this one. If you're using power to pop over rock ledges and such, this probably isn't the kit for you. It would be great for 'expedition travel' though. I've been comparing some of the smaller industrial diesels to the output of my 4.0, and while hp is WAY down with the diesels, they typically have MUCH more torque in the rpm range where I actually drive it.
Sent from my LG-VM701 using Tapatalk 2
Sent from my LG-VM701 using Tapatalk 2
Dan Grec
Expedition Leader
I showed the numbers compared to my old 2.5 TJ.... this engine has 100 ft. lbs. more torque - so it's clearly going to be better than that, and IMHO, the 2.5 was already good enough for driving 40,000 mi.
As for mileage, it's a turbo diesel with higher compression and better tech for efficiency. While we don't have confirmation, based on the TDIs I've driven, I'd be very, very surprised if it gets less than 25MPG highway in a TJ or YJ.
-Dan