Jeep Garage  - Jeep Forum banner

2041 - 2060 of 2153 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
194 Posts
The 8HP70 /8HP75 is built by ZF in two locations; South Carolina & Germany.

The FCA plant in Indiana builds the 850RFE
Found this in FCA material: "Each engine mates to the durable, robust TorqueFlite eight-speed automatic transmission"

It's my understanding TorqueFlite is the FCA branding for the ZF8HP that is built by FCA in Kokomo, IN, which seems to have more issues than the German built one. Am I incorrect on this?

I LOVE my WK2's German built ZF. It is one of the best performing transmissions I have ever driven.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Trax

·
Premium Member
Durango Citadel
Joined
·
950 Posts
Yes it's the FCA name for their version of the ZF8 which is build under license. We have it in our '14 Durango and we've had zero issues.
 

·
Registered
2017 JKUR and 2016 WD 5.7
Joined
·
34 Posts
Found this in FCA material: "Each engine mates to the durable, robust TorqueFlite eight-speed automatic transmission"

It's my understanding TorqueFlite is the FCA branding for the ZF8HP that is built by FCA in Kokomo, IN, which seems to have more issues than the German built one. Am I incorrect on this?

I LOVE my WK2's German built ZF. It is one of the best performing transmissions I have ever driven.
Yes, but TorqueFlite is only the marketing name, it doesn’t designate its origin.

  • FCA built transmissions (Indiana): 845RE, 850RE
  • FCA purchased transmissions from ZF (South Carolina or Germany): 8HP70, 8HP75, 8HP90, 8HP95
 

·
Registered
2014 Jeep Grand Cherokee Limited
Joined
·
479 Posts
Yes it's the FCA name for their version of the ZF8 which is build under license. We have it in our '14 Durango and we've had zero issues.
My transmission on 2014 WK2 limited Pentastar engine had to changed at 100k miles...Rough shifting and eventually failed, never liked that transmission.
I think has to do with the software, had to be in the shop countless times after buying the vehicle in 2014...
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,209 Posts
options are the new, two-row Grand Cherokee and the Model Y.
That's kinda where I am at..... an eye on a Model Y possibly. If it weren't for the hassles of getting a charger port in my condo building, I'd probably be moving forward with a Y. Dunno, but those seem to be my two choices when I look for my next vehicle - 2 row GC or Model Y (unless the Model X gets a redesign without the falcon doors and high price tag). Lots of Teslas around here... Definitely will test drive the new GC though, maybe I will really like it!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
48 Posts
This idea of cargo space comparisons between the WK2 and the 3-seater L needs to be fully evaluated before purchasing (any SUV).

The big question as Jim pointed out is priorities. For example, what are the needs for your family?

With all seats up the L only has 17 CF of cargo space.
The WK2 has 36 CF.

With the 50/50 split 3rd row down the L has 50 CF with both seats down, and 33 CF with one down.
The WK2 has 56 CF with the 2/3 portion of 2nd row down, 47 CF with the 1/3 portion down, and 68 CF with full 2nd row down.

Finally, the L has 85 CF with the 2nd and 3 rd row down.

So, if you have a family of 5 going to the airport with a bunch of suitcases, you actually have more usable cargo space with the WK2 — 36 CF vs. 33 CF.

For a family of 4 going to the airport -- the L has 50 CF vs. 47 CF for the WK2.

From a family-to-the-airport point of view, sounds like a wash to me.
A family of 5 can still sit in the L with the 3rd row folded flat. You are assuming they have the captain chairs as the second row. IF they dont have the captain seats and have a bench seat for the second row, they have much more useable storage space.

If you are stating that most will take the captain chairs in second row in the L, then you must also assume they will not be heading to the airport 95% of the time and instead driving it and wanting the added luxury of going to a football game, school recital, kids games, etc.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,405 Posts
Found this in FCA material: "Each engine mates to the durable, robust TorqueFlite eight-speed automatic transmission"

It's my understanding TorqueFlite is the FCA branding for the ZF8HP that is built by FCA in Kokomo, IN, which seems to have more issues than the German built one. Am I incorrect on this?

I LOVE my WK2's German built ZF. It is one of the best performing transmissions I have ever driven.
IIRC: The marketing name for all the ZF8s FCA uses in US product is "TorqueFlite 8" whether or not they are built in Kokomo.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
9,288 Posts
My transmission on 2014 WK2 limited Pentastar engine had to changed at 100k miles...Rough shifting and eventually failed, never liked that transmission.
I think has to do with the software, had to be in the shop countless times after buying the vehicle in 2014...
Early MY14 builds had some transmission issues that were resolved later.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tallguy

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,289 Posts
The change for which I was hoping the most was the availability of the eTorque engines. Although I intend to keep my 2012 Overland HEMI until it dies, I also drive a Tesla Model 3. The smoothness of the Tesla’s BEV powertrain makes the Jeep’s ICE powertrain feel really clunky. My “if it dies” options are the new, two-row Grand Cherokee and the Model Y. If the Jeep doesn’t get a smoother, more modern powertrain, I’d probably go with the Tesla.
The WL74 is getting the PHEV (4xe) drivetrain which looks good.....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,289 Posts
No QTII or Off-road group for limited is lame-o.

May be rectified in the WL74.
It looks to me that the WL75 is more people mover with some AWD capability, the WL74 to be more offroad focused. So I'd say offroaders will stick with the 2 row.....
 

·
Registered
Subaru Legacy STIEVO
Joined
·
2,010 Posts
This idea of cargo space comparisons between the WK2 and the 3-seater L needs to be fully evaluated before purchasing (any SUV).

The big question as Jim pointed out is priorities. For example, what are the needs for your family?

With all seats up the L only has 17 CF of cargo space.
The WK2 has 36 CF.

With the 50/50 split 3rd row down the L has 50 CF with both seats down, and 33 CF with one down.
The WK2 has 56 CF with the 2/3 portion of 2nd row down, 47 CF with the 1/3 portion down, and 68 CF with full 2nd row down.

Finally, the L has 85 CF with the 2nd and 3 rd row down.

So, if you have a family of 5 going to the airport with a bunch of suitcases, you actually have more usable cargo space with the WK2 — 36 CF vs. 33 CF.

For a family of 4 going to the airport -- the L has 50 CF vs. 47 CF for the WK2.

From a family-to-the-airport point of view, sounds like a wash to me.

I think your numbers are correct but somewhere you made a mistake in your analysis. A family of 4 would have more room behind the captain's chairs (with third row folded). There are other advantages, if the two people in the 2nd row are kids. They each have their own space and fight less. Grandparents can ride in the back, rarely as they do. The family dog can share loyalties by parking himself between the captain chairs in the 2nd row. A Dometic fridge may love that space as well as well as any Pelican case for the MSR or 12 ga of your choice.

The space, with a folded 3rd row is actually 47 cu ft in the WLL vs. the 36 cu ft in the WK2. In your example, you conveniently fold down 1/3 of the WK2 bench but don't allow for the same in the WLL. The fair comparison is 50+ vs 36 not 50 vs. 47. If you have captain's chairs in the second row, you have additional floor space, maybe enough for another slimmer carry-on or for 2 backpacks or other personal carry items between seats - without having to fold seats - and still carry 4 people. Not only is the WLL bigger behind the second row, but you can always fold its 2nd row as well if you configure it with a bench seat.

And to the point that someone else made before, this is a Durango redesigned from the ground up, riding on a new platform. Even the straight down/inward sloping radiator grille is more Durango than WK2, not just the sizes. Nothing wrong with that, just sad to see the Durango nameplate disappear. Hope they keep it as a cheaper BOF, aimed at a different market. FCA has nothing in the Tahoe/Suburban/Yukon/Expedition space, only in the Escalade/Navigator territory (with the upcoming Wagoneer).
 

·
The Negotiator
Joined
·
5,349 Posts
Early MY14 builds had some transmission issues that were resolved later.
Haha, no they weren't. My 2017 is no better on the harsh transmission shifts from my 2014.
 

·
Registered
2018 GC HA
Joined
·
661 Posts
FCA has nothing in the Tahoe/Suburban/Yukon/Expedition space, only in the Escalade/Navigator territory (with the upcoming Wagoneer).
False. The Wagoneer will compete with Tahoe/Suburban/Yukon/Expedition. The Grand Wagoneer will compete with Escalade/Navigator.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
9,288 Posts
Haha, no they weren't. My 2017 is no better on the harsh transmission shifts from my 2014.
My recollection is that there were some significant issues with the drivetrain for early MY14 builds so that was the impetus for my reply. It was a whole new electrical system in addition to a new 8 speed transmission setup. There certainly have been additional "programming opportunities" with the transmissions since then, however. That actually seems to be common with many makes/models these days because everything is computer driven. The vehicle I'm currently driving has some quirks in that respect that remain unresolved over three model years.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SnoFire

·
Premium Member
Durango Citadel
Joined
·
950 Posts
...and our early build '14 Durango has been problem free with respect to the transmission.
 

·
Registered
GC Overland
Joined
·
37 Posts
...and our early build '14 Durango has been problem free with respect to the transmission.
My recollection is that there were some significant issues with the drivetrain for early MY14 builds so that was the impetus for my reply. It was a whole new electrical system in addition to a new 8 speed transmission setup. There certainly have been additional "programming opportunities" with the transmissions since then, however. That actually seems to be common with many makes/models these days because everything is computer driven. The vehicle I'm currently driving has some quirks in that respect that remain unresolved over three model years.
I have had no negative issues with my 2017 GC's 8HP/70 (5.7), only very positive ones.I shift manually during city driving. I find that in auto mode, with ECO off, the GC holds first gear a bit too long and sometimes second gear too, in low load conditions. This is just a programming issue. By the auto programming holding first gear a bit too long at times the shift into second can be felt in a way that my short shifting makes almost unnoticeable. Not what I would consider "mechanical harshness". I know this is "one in a row" statistically but the the Torqueflite/ZF 8HP auto trans in my '17 Overland is one of my favorite features of the GC. It's lightening fast in manual mode, has great gear ratio spreads, and is considered by many to be the best in the industry in its category. Of course I know from past posts that other members have not had my exact experience, especially in the WK2's earlier years.
 
2041 - 2060 of 2153 Posts
Top