Multi-Displacement System in HEMI-Equipped Grand Cherokees
Posted by mike on 2004/6/17 23:00:00 (304) reads
|
Run on 8-cylinders when you need power, 4 when cruising.
(from a DaimlerChrylser press release) "The Chrysler Group Multi-Displacement System (MDS) seamlessly alternates between smooth, high fuel economy four-cylinder mode when less power is needed, and V-8 mode when more power from the 5.7L HEMI engine is in demand," said Eric Ridenour, Executive Vice President Product Development, Chrysler Group. "This optimizes fuel economy when V-8 power is not needed, without sacrificing vehicle performance—2005 Chrysler 300C and Dodge Magnum RT owners will get the maximum benefit without any compromises." The HEMI-powered 2005 Jeep Grand Cherokee will come equipped with MDS as standard equipment. Owners of the Chrysler 300, Dodge Magnum and Jeep Grand Cherokee will receive the powerful benefit of the HEMI engine with the fuel economy that they would only expect from a smaller, less powerful engine. "The MDS was part of the engine's original design," said Bob Lee, Vice President Powertrain Product Team, Chrysler Group. "This resulted in a cylinder-deactivation system that is elegantly simple and completely integrated into the engine design. The benefits are fewer parts, maximum reliability and lower cost." The HEMI engine with MDS has completed over 6.5 million customer-equivalent miles through Chrysler Group's development and durability testing. It is covered by the 7-Year/70,000-mile Limited Powertrain warranty. The system deactivates the valve lifters. This keeps the valves in four cylinders closed, and there is no combustion. In addition to stopping combustion, energy is not lost by pumping air through these cylinders. Customers will experience estimated fuel economy gains of up to 20 percent under various driving conditions, and a projected 10 percent aggregate improvement. Improved fuel economy is realized without any change in customer experience—drivers will receive the benefit without changing their driving habits and without compromising style, comfort or convenience.
Reader Reactions
The comments are owned by the poster. We aren't responsible for their content. You must login or register to post a comment.
Poster |
Thread |
Anonymous |
Posted: 1969/12/31 18:00 Updated: 1969/12/31 18:00 |
|
 Originally posted by: MoparManiac I'm sure the engineers have it covered but how do you disable the valves without breaking the rings? I can still remember a friend who broke the rings in his car when the rocker arm slipped off of the intake valve.
|
|
|
Poster |
Thread |
Anonymous |
Posted: 1969/12/31 18:00 Updated: 1969/12/31 18:00 |
|
 Originally posted by: Simple Jeep is doing the right thing, if you want simple buy a Wrangler. If you want your wife to haul your kids around in a vehicle that you can still take on Jeep Jamborees buy a Liberty or Grand Cherokee. I have a Liberty, Grand Cherokee and CJ-5, they all serve different purposes. I would love for my wifes Grand to get better gas milage, and I believe Jeep better stay on top of the luxury market as well as the off-road capable market. So far they have been able to appeal to both.
|
|
|
Poster |
Thread |
Anonymous |
Posted: 1969/12/31 18:00 Updated: 1969/12/31 18:00 |
|
 Originally posted by: Robert Comment... Go buy a Cadillac then... WHY do you want a JEEP to equal a POS GM vehicle? Jeep meant something in the past, will it in the future?
|
|
|
Poster |
Thread |
Anonymous |
Posted: 1969/12/31 18:00 Updated: 1969/12/31 18:00 |
|
 Originally posted by: Jon Last time I checked my 00 Wrangler 4.0L had a computer and when my check engine light goes on I am just as screwed as I am when I am in my Grand Cherokee and the check engine light goes on.
|
|
|
Poster |
Thread |
Anonymous |
Posted: 1969/12/31 18:00 Updated: 1969/12/31 18:00 |
|
 Originally posted by: Concerned Taxpayer It looks like Diamler-Chrysler is trying to turn Jeep into a version of Cadillac with high tech engine features and electronic gadgetry.
Big mistake. It's not the type of image that's going to work for Jeep in the long run.
A new Scrambler, the Dakar, and the Rescue are the types of vehicles that will bring customers into Jeep showrooms in future years, not a re-badged Cadillac Escalade.
Dainty, high-tech electronic gadgetry and suspensions don't sell Jeeps.
|
|
|
Poster |
Thread |
Anonymous |
Posted: 1969/12/31 18:00 Updated: 1969/12/31 18:00 |
|
 Originally posted by: Brett The new grand will be appealing to someone...and there are still plenty of other old jeeps out there(CJs YJs and now that they stopped makin em, XJs) They are still makin the TJ, so what does it matter. Check out gas prices these days...good fuel economy will help sell these jeeps. Just face it, DC wants to make money and thats that.
|
|
|
Poster |
Thread |
Anonymous |
Posted: 1969/12/31 18:00 Updated: 1969/12/31 18:00 |
|
 Originally posted by: Jon who are you talking to CJJeep?
|
|
|
Poster |
Thread |
Anonymous |
Posted: 1969/12/31 18:00 Updated: 1969/12/31 18:00 |
|
 Originally posted by: JeepCJ You want Jeep to build a vehicle that does not have a computer on it? Ther'e's a step in the right direction! If you want an old Jeep you can play with in your garage then buy an old CJ.
|
|
|
Poster |
Thread |
Anonymous |
Posted: 1969/12/31 18:00 Updated: 1969/12/31 18:00 |
|
 Originally posted by: Carl C/T... Robert... Get over it. Anyone that is doing serious offroading in a Grand Cherokee needs his head checked anyway.
Sure it is offroad capable, but what type of market is their for SERIOUS offroaders that want a Grand Cherokee? The answer? It's not a big one.
The Grand Cherokee isn't targeted at people that want rock crawlers, thats why they make the Wrangler. The Grand is targeted at Jeep owners that want something bigger, that can haul the family boat and kids on a camping trip.
As a Wrangler, and Cherokee owner I can appreciate having a vehicle that is still capable offroad but with it's primary purpose being ON ROAD.
I'll use my Wrangler offroad. I need a 2nd vehicle for non-serious offroading. Light duty offroading, running around town, etc.
You people need to get off your high horse, technology evolves. Automobiles evolve. Accept it and grow up.
|
|
|
Poster |
Thread |
Anonymous |
Posted: 1969/12/31 18:00 Updated: 1969/12/31 18:00 |
|
 Originally posted by: Robert I agree w/ CT... Jeeps are suppose to simple, capable, and simple (did I say simple?) vehicles. Electronic gadgets may impress the yups out there who want to say they have a Jeep - BUT - it's going to push the real Jeepers away (me included). I want more vehicles like the Rubicon, Scrambler, Rescue, etc. I'd just LOVE to be out in the back country wheelin my nice new GC when some electronic gizmo decides to sh!t out and leave me stranded w/ no ability to troubleshoot it...
|
|
|
Poster |
Thread |
Anonymous |
Posted: 1969/12/31 18:00 Updated: 1969/12/31 18:00 |
|
 Originally posted by: comment the wrangeler will remain as complicated as a shovel. as for the rest of the jeep family (2 vehicles) i find it a breath of fresh air that jeep finally is starting to get it, that the MAJORITY of jeep owners keep their vehicles on the road and want all of the extra features offered on ALL of the major manufacturers. look at the success of gm w/ cadillac...it sure would be great for jeep to go in that direction keeping in mind the TRUE VALUE of the wrangler and the popularity of the off roading consumer ALONG with those of us that LOVE our jeeps but want the added luxuries that we can not currently get. now just get us about 4 new products from jeep asap not 2-3 years down the road. progress is good...
|
|
|
Poster |
Thread |
Anonymous |
Posted: 1969/12/31 18:00 Updated: 1969/12/31 18:00 |
|
 Originally posted by: Concerned Taxpayer Jeeps are traditionally supposed to be as complicated as a shovel.
Think you'll be able to work on this multi-displacement, hemi-engined, exotic suspensioned, onstar-navigating, automatic rear view mirror dimming, $55K msrp new "Jeep" in your driveway?
|
|
|
Poster |
Thread |
Anonymous |
Posted: 1969/12/31 18:00 Updated: 1969/12/31 18:00 |
|
 Originally posted by: Jon I don't think making an engine more fuel effecient has anything to do with Jeep being capable.
|
|
|
Poster |
Thread |
Anonymous |
Posted: 1969/12/31 18:00 Updated: 1969/12/31 18:00 |
|
 Originally posted by: Dan I agree with Jon, who wouldn't want a few extra MPG?
|
|
|
|
|