2020 Jeep Wrangler Unlimited 3.0L EcoDiesel

foxhunter

Adventurer
Can’t wait. Hoping a diesel in sarge green is available in the Rubicon by December as some articles have speculated. Hope the tow rating is better, too
 

Metcalf

Expedition Leader
Can’t wait. Hoping a diesel in sarge green is available in the Rubicon by December as some articles have speculated. Hope the tow rating is better, too
I honestly think the Rubicon package with the Diesel is going to be a waste. The 8spd auto doesn't need the 4:1 transfer case in my experience. The diesel package is going to include a Dana 44 front and rear axle also ( minus the rubicon lockers and extra axle width ). I think the diesel package is going to be the sleeper deal of the decade for the JLU.
 

furbucket

Observer
Want to be excited- but I currently own the 3.0L ecodiesel in its 2015 Grand Cherokee form. Used to be fantastic, but ever since the exhaust lawsuit and “update” it’s been nothing but regens, shite fuel economy, and (assuming) constantly full DPF issues... needless to say, not as happy as I once was. If I wasn’t in California, I would have tuned my way out of such issues. (I do appreciate $3k of the original $4k+ premium for the diesel being returned)

That said, the acceleration and torque of this engine in a Wangler would be a blast, add some lockers and nothing would stop you! Also, A Wrangler with a genuinely useful tow rating...!


Sent from an evil pocket calculator with a flashy screen using Tapatalk
 

Justincredible

Adventurer
$4,000 option + $2,000 8 speed auto option.
The 8 speed in the V6 is going up in price to $2,750, so diesel is essentially a $3,250 option over the equivalent V6.

Not bad.
 

G0to60

Observer
I wouldn't get excited for a higher tow rating. It's more than just the engine. They would need to up the brakes and cooling too but there's nothing they can do about the wheel base. There's a reason why the Gladiator has a higher tow rating. They addressed all of these but didn't do anything with the engine.

Personally, I think the age of the diesel is gone. The benefits (tough, fuel economy, torque) have all been reduced in order to make them better on emissions. Now they are over complicated and just barely get better mileage than many gas engines.
 

Metcalf

Expedition Leader
I wouldn't get excited for a higher tow rating. It's more than just the engine. They would need to up the brakes and cooling too but there's nothing they can do about the wheel base. There's a reason why the Gladiator has a higher tow rating. They addressed all of these but didn't do anything with the engine.

Personally, I think the age of the diesel is gone. The benefits (tough, fuel economy, torque) have all been reduced in order to make them better on emissions. Now they are over complicated and just barely get better mileage than many gas engines.
The rumor is that the Diesel JLU may get the updated nose and cooling package from JT program.

The Grand Cherokee EcoDiesel had a 7000lb tow rating with a 110" wheelbase.
 

T-Willy

Active member
A diesel unlimited sport, adding lockers and an Ursa Minor pop-top, would be very attractive--utilitarian but capable with good range. Wonder what it's payload will be?
 
Last edited:

Metcalf

Expedition Leader
A diesel unlimited sport, adding lockers and an Ursa Minor pop-top, would be very attractive--utilitarian but capable with good range. Wonder what it's payload will be.
I hear the payload is only going to be about 1200lbs just like the other JLU Wranglers. The JT is only officially 1400lbs if I remember right though.

I'd love to see another option similar to the J8 program on the JK ( but honestly without the rear leaf springs.
There vehicles are getting larger and larger, but the 'official' numbers have always been underwhelming.
 

T-Willy

Active member
I hear the payload is only going to be about 1200lbs just like the other JLU Wranglers. The JT is only officially 1400lbs if I remember right though.

I'd love to see another option similar to the J8 program on the JK ( but honestly without the rear leaf springs.
There vehicles are getting larger and larger, but the 'official' numbers have always been underwhelming.
Yeah, 1200 is underwhelming -- nearly disqualifying for remote touring. If that's the case, bummer.
 

Metcalf

Expedition Leader
Yeah, 1200 is underwhelming -- nearly disqualifying for remote touring. If that's the case, bummer.
Most of the USA mid-size vehicles are just about the same. We just don't get any 'commercial' level upgrades for payload in the USA on vehicles like this sadly. Unofficially, the JK and JL have put in tons of miles on hard trails being VERY overloaded when just looking at the factory 'approved' numbers. I would personally try and keep them as light as practical, because that just works better all around, but I would love to see some tech on how to increase payload similar to the J8 military durability program on the JKU.
 

T-Willy

Active member
Most of the USA mid-size vehicles are just about the same. We just don't get any 'commercial' level upgrades for payload in the USA on vehicles like this sadly. Unofficially, the JK and JL have put in tons of miles on hard trails being VERY overloaded when just looking at the factory 'approved' numbers. I would personally try and keep them as light as practical, because that just works better all around, but I would love to see some tech on how to increase payload similar to the J8 military durability program on the JKU.
Indeed - keenly aware. Which is why the new Defender is such a unique offering--class-leading payload and good capability atop a not-too-big platform. But in that case, at least for me, worst-in-class brand reliability is disqualifying.
 
Top