My Report: The Jeep Engineers Speak!
03-15-2007, 07:59 AM
#1
JK Junkie
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: AT LARGE somewhere in CT
Posts: 2,710
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My Report: The Jeep Engineers Speak!
OK - I was a traitor this morning, and was looking at another Jeep forum. So, to save y'all the trouble of being traitors, I'm giving the "highlights" of a JK-specific Q&A session that the Jeep engineers participated in last night. So - without giving any sort of endorsement or linking away from THIS great forum, I bring you my report on the Q&A with the Jeep engineers last night (remember, this is from another "jeep forum" [that's a "dot-com" 
]...
Well, I read through all 22 pages of it this morning (on a really long coffee break
), and here are some key points. Note: Anything you see in quotes below is my paraphrased recollection of what I read, and NOT a direct quote:
1) They weren't allowed to comment on ANY future product offerings, such as new gas or diesel engines, models (ahem, Gladiator concept), etc., but gave the impression that there were some future developments worth noting... I'm drawing the inference that there will in fact be some additional engine choice at some point in the future, but that it's a ways off.
2) There were a lot of questions about why they decided to replace the older-than-dirt 4.0L with the current 3.8L engine, and their answer indicated that it was not only a concession toward conformity with crash standards, but also, cost was a consideration. Specifically, it was mentioned that the Wrangler platform was the only DCX offering which made use of the 4.0L, and that it just didn't make fiscal sense to continue production of the 4.0L (not to mention that it wouldn't have passed impact standards). Couple the engineers' answers with the rumor that the tooling on the 4.0L was worn out, and I think you have your truthful answer - DCX probably didn't see any sense in paying to retool the line for a one-model engine. The engineers DID express that they chose the 3.8L engine for its torque characteristics, and went as far as to say that it was the engine that most closely matched the 4.0L's engine characteristics, for off-roading.
3) There was an interesting back-and-forth about the interior plastic, and while they couldn't comment on future product offerings/changes, they DID say that "they're always evaluating" new materials, etc... I, for one, was given the impression that this was considered a "known issue" and that it was actively being reviewed for improvement.
3.5) On this same note of "gripes," several folks brought up the 2-door's backseat access (or lack of) issue... the engineers' answer was that while they didn't intentionally make it difficult to get back there, there wasn't too much of an emphasis on making it "easy," since the product planning people figured that anyone really concerned with backseat access would just go out and buy a 4-door.
4) There were some owner questions about lift recommendations, etc., and the answer from the engineers was "don't lift it" (surprise surprise). Later, they went on to say that all of them are Wrangler owners themselves, and each and every one of them is running a modified (to some extent) Jeep... the main reasons I believe they said "no" to lifts are: 1) The ESP/ETC system is specifically programmed for a certain configuration, and they stated that there is no way to "reflash" to adjust for a larger lift and bigger tires than offered from the factory... 2) The "rigorous" testing that they're required to perform before production wasn't performed on a lifted Jeep, and therefore, they can't stand by any issues that arise as a result of modification (standard corporate response if ever there was one).
5) This sounds promising: One owner posed the question - "How many miles can I expect my JK to last, while being used LIKE A JEEP IS SUPPOSED TO BE?" (i.e. wheeling included). The engineers' response was that, while they couldn't comment on the specific "product lifecycle reliability standards" that the JK is built to achieve, they COULD share with us that the JK was held to higher quality and reliability goals than any Jeep before it. That's a good thing, long-term... although I think we can all agree that there are/were some electronic gremlins that could've been "tested out" a little more thoroughly. Interestingly, I didn't see any questions concerning the "stall bug."
5.5) Come to think of it, I can't recall any questions about the leaking Freedom Tops... there were a lot of questions about the "supply" of Freedom Tops, and the rumor that a redesign was in-the-works, but those questions were answered with the old "we're not allowed to address future products and development." This makes me wonder if the odd lack of "leak" questions was an act of censorship by that other forum?
6) This Q&A session was not a "corporate-mandated" event - it was a group of engineers getting together after-hours with some pizza to field questions from owners, because they care about the Jeep community. I think that speaks pretty highly of these guys, that they'd cut into their personal time to address us owners' concerns.
All in all, I thought it was a worthwhile read, and the Jeep engineers come across as a really cool group of Wrangler owners that wheel 'em like the rest of us. So, my question to WayOfLife and the great folks that keep this forum for us: Is there any chance that you could arrange a similar Q&A with the Jeep engineers, for this forum? I know that this other "jeep forum" predates the dinosaurs, and therefore is a well-known and established community, but I'm hopeful that Jeep would look at this forum and see that we're just as good and dedicated (IMHO, much better in fact!). What are the chances? <prod><prod>
No hard feelings, WOL and mods, for viewing the other, LESSER forum, right?
]... Well, I read through all 22 pages of it this morning (on a really long coffee break
), and here are some key points. Note: Anything you see in quotes below is my paraphrased recollection of what I read, and NOT a direct quote:1) They weren't allowed to comment on ANY future product offerings, such as new gas or diesel engines, models (ahem, Gladiator concept), etc., but gave the impression that there were some future developments worth noting... I'm drawing the inference that there will in fact be some additional engine choice at some point in the future, but that it's a ways off.
2) There were a lot of questions about why they decided to replace the older-than-dirt 4.0L with the current 3.8L engine, and their answer indicated that it was not only a concession toward conformity with crash standards, but also, cost was a consideration. Specifically, it was mentioned that the Wrangler platform was the only DCX offering which made use of the 4.0L, and that it just didn't make fiscal sense to continue production of the 4.0L (not to mention that it wouldn't have passed impact standards). Couple the engineers' answers with the rumor that the tooling on the 4.0L was worn out, and I think you have your truthful answer - DCX probably didn't see any sense in paying to retool the line for a one-model engine. The engineers DID express that they chose the 3.8L engine for its torque characteristics, and went as far as to say that it was the engine that most closely matched the 4.0L's engine characteristics, for off-roading.
3) There was an interesting back-and-forth about the interior plastic, and while they couldn't comment on future product offerings/changes, they DID say that "they're always evaluating" new materials, etc... I, for one, was given the impression that this was considered a "known issue" and that it was actively being reviewed for improvement.
3.5) On this same note of "gripes," several folks brought up the 2-door's backseat access (or lack of) issue... the engineers' answer was that while they didn't intentionally make it difficult to get back there, there wasn't too much of an emphasis on making it "easy," since the product planning people figured that anyone really concerned with backseat access would just go out and buy a 4-door.
4) There were some owner questions about lift recommendations, etc., and the answer from the engineers was "don't lift it" (surprise surprise). Later, they went on to say that all of them are Wrangler owners themselves, and each and every one of them is running a modified (to some extent) Jeep... the main reasons I believe they said "no" to lifts are: 1) The ESP/ETC system is specifically programmed for a certain configuration, and they stated that there is no way to "reflash" to adjust for a larger lift and bigger tires than offered from the factory... 2) The "rigorous" testing that they're required to perform before production wasn't performed on a lifted Jeep, and therefore, they can't stand by any issues that arise as a result of modification (standard corporate response if ever there was one).
5) This sounds promising: One owner posed the question - "How many miles can I expect my JK to last, while being used LIKE A JEEP IS SUPPOSED TO BE?" (i.e. wheeling included). The engineers' response was that, while they couldn't comment on the specific "product lifecycle reliability standards" that the JK is built to achieve, they COULD share with us that the JK was held to higher quality and reliability goals than any Jeep before it. That's a good thing, long-term... although I think we can all agree that there are/were some electronic gremlins that could've been "tested out" a little more thoroughly. Interestingly, I didn't see any questions concerning the "stall bug."
5.5) Come to think of it, I can't recall any questions about the leaking Freedom Tops... there were a lot of questions about the "supply" of Freedom Tops, and the rumor that a redesign was in-the-works, but those questions were answered with the old "we're not allowed to address future products and development." This makes me wonder if the odd lack of "leak" questions was an act of censorship by that other forum?
6) This Q&A session was not a "corporate-mandated" event - it was a group of engineers getting together after-hours with some pizza to field questions from owners, because they care about the Jeep community. I think that speaks pretty highly of these guys, that they'd cut into their personal time to address us owners' concerns.
All in all, I thought it was a worthwhile read, and the Jeep engineers come across as a really cool group of Wrangler owners that wheel 'em like the rest of us. So, my question to WayOfLife and the great folks that keep this forum for us: Is there any chance that you could arrange a similar Q&A with the Jeep engineers, for this forum? I know that this other "jeep forum" predates the dinosaurs, and therefore is a well-known and established community, but I'm hopeful that Jeep would look at this forum and see that we're just as good and dedicated (IMHO, much better in fact!). What are the chances? <prod><prod>
No hard feelings, WOL and mods, for viewing the other, LESSER forum, right?
03-15-2007, 11:54 AM
#4
JK Junkie
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: AT LARGE somewhere in CT
Posts: 2,710
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You guys are welcome - I feel like I kind of stumbled onto the "holy grail" of information, because there had been SO much speculation about why the 4.0 was replaced, etc... this answers a lot of those questions, even if the engineers weren't allowed to go into TOO much detail. Glad you enjoyed it.
03-15-2007, 04:37 PM
#5
JK Newbie
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
6) This Q&A session was not a "corporate-mandated" event - it was a group of engineers getting together after-hours with some pizza to field questions from owners, because they care about the Jeep community. I think that speaks pretty highly of these guys, that they'd cut into their personal time to address us owners' concerns.
03-15-2007, 04:58 PM
#6
Yeah thanks for recapping it MJS...sounds like overall there wasnt a lot of meat to that interview, for the usual corporate reasons unfortunately. But at least we got a few nuggets... nice work! 
