Jeep Wrangler 4xe Forum banner

Actual mpg after 6000 miles

2513 Views 70 Replies 17 Participants Last post by  BilLongua
I’ve crested 6000 miles in a little more than six months of ownership. My computer has figured around 36 mpg, but I calculated miles against how many gallons I actually used. The result is 68 mpg! I’m one of those fortunate folks that the 4xe Jeep is perfect for: lots of shorter trips and occasional long one. Additionally we have relatively cheap electricity. I’m always plugged in at home with a level 2 I added for less than $300. It seems it will save a lot on gas, but I realize it will never cover the premium price for the Summit 4xe. But I get to drive in a much nicer, much better performance car for around the same as a less expensive model. At a minimum the 4xe allows you to better rationalize the splurge😎.
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: 5
21 - 40 of 71 Posts
As for the concept that the PHEV will hold more value than other ICE or Diesel trucks, I doubt it highly. Once they figure out the battery replacement/recycling etc, maybe they will be more valuable.
I think you misunderstood my post...
My comparison was the value of Diesel pickup vs. ICE pickup.
I'm hoping the PHEV will be equal or higher value than EV's because of the battery issues and the lack of infrastructure.
The 4xe fits my needs as a multi use vehicle. I would need another non EV to fill my needs for long trip travel because of the limited charging stations, charge time and higher cost of electricity.
As hard as it is for us to believe there are people who think that EV charging stations are FREE to use.
I forecast in the next 3-4 years we shift from EV to Hydrogen.
I hope you're right on the time frame.
I hate the idea, but there is little Electric infra yet and the power grid will be the next week link. Hydrogen can be maintained mostly with the current Petrol distribution network. Let's see.
I have worked in the electrical field from substations>distribution>structures>the outlets that the Level 1 EVSE's plug in to, and can 100% say this is a fact that is being completely ignored.
The push to EV's is a text book example of "putting the cart before the horse"
  • Like
Reactions: 1
I added a Mustart level two charger and did the electrical myself with a friend. It was very easy as we had a free fifty amp breaker set.
  • Like
Reactions: 1
MUSTART Level 2 Portable EV Charger (240 Volt, 25ft Cable, 16/25/32 Amp Adjustable) Electric Vehicle Charger Plug-in EV Charging Stat...
  • Like
  • Sad
Reactions: 2
I think you misunderstood my post...
My comparison was the value of Diesel pickup vs. ICE pickup.
I'm hoping the PHEV will be equal or higher value than EV's because of the battery issues and the lack of infrastructure.
The 4xe fits my needs as a multi use vehicle. I would need another non EV to fill my needs for long trip travel because of the limited charging stations, charge time and higher cost of electricity.
As hard as it is for us to believe there are people who think that EV charging stations are FREE to use.

I hope you're right on the time frame.

I have worked in the electrical field from substations>distribution>structures>the outlets that the Level 1 EVSE's plug in to, and can 100% say this is a fact that is being completely ignored.
The push to EV's is a text book example of "putting the cart before the horse"
Hydrogen is not as easy to make, distribute, store or use. Plus go boom. ICE powered by hydrogen is simply just not efficient and not as perfect as 'just makes water!' We use electricity to power just about every technology we have. The energy storage issues have improved by leaps and bounds in the last decade while H is still stuck in a few refilling stations in california (and mostly for fuel cell units that use electricity to function). The charging infrastructure for long hauls stinks today, but I can fuel up my EV and PHEV at home for pennies on the kWH, which I couldn't do with gas or hydrogen. EVs are not perfect - but they are 1000% better than ICE for the world and the future and proper battery care/maintenance is something that is also improving exponentially. The arguments against simply don't hold water and are mostly oil company talking points. Crap like windmills kill birds. A fact, yes, but misses the point by a million miles and the impact of which is grossly overstated. I'd rather see renewable sourced electric plants (use hydrogen!) that delivers clean power to our homes and future charging stations to power our entire transportation industry. We already know how to move electrons everywhere. Going to a hydrogen based fuel to replace gas, requiring an absolutely massive infrastucture investment (can't just dump it in a holding tank that used store E85), seems a lot more challenging then improving the charging network. That effort would better suited to replacing our fossil fuel powered energy generation plants for all the power we use for literally everything else. :)
See less See more
  • Like
Reactions: 1
I added a Mustart level two charger and did the electrical myself with a friend. It was very easy as we had a free fifty amp breaker set.
Get a new EVSE. Now.

Mustarts are the brand that cause the most damage to vehicles. They are not J1772 compliant and damage from them has been denied under Jeep warranty.


The images shown in the Nissan investigation are of the older mustart units, but the issues have continued on with the newer models.

Other reports of mustarts causing damage:







https://www.reddit.com/r/BoltEV/comments/rb4hnk

See less See more
  • Like
Reactions: 3
The push to EV's is a text book example of "putting the cart before the horse"
Allan_B said:
I forecast in the next 3-4 years we shift from EV to Hydrogen.

Or H2S. That would be putting the fart before the arse.
Hydrogen is not as easy to make, distribute, store or use. Plus go boom. ICE powered by hydrogen is simply just not efficient and not as perfect as 'just makes water!' We use electricity to power just about every technology we have. The energy storage issues have improved by leaps and bounds in the last decade while H is still stuck in a few refilling stations in california (and mostly for fuel cell units that use electricity to function). The charging infrastructure for long hauls stinks today, but I can fuel up my EV and PHEV at home for pennies on the kWH, which I couldn't do with gas or hydrogen. EVs are not perfect - but they are 1000% better than ICE for the world and the future and proper battery care/maintenance is something that is also improving exponentially. The arguments against simply don't hold water and are mostly oil company talking points. Crap like windmills kill birds. A fact, yes, but misses the point by a million miles and the impact of which is grossly overstated. I'd rather see renewable sourced electric plants (use hydrogen!) that delivers clean power to our homes and future charging stations to power our entire transportation industry. We already know how to move electrons everywhere. Going to a hydrogen based fuel to replace gas, requiring an absolutely massive infrastucture investment (can't just dump it in a holding tank that used store E85), seems a lot more challenging then improving the charging network. That effort would better suited to replacing our fossil fuel powered energy generation plants for all the power we use for literally everything else. :)
Hydrogen fuel is transported and stored as a liquid. There is an already functioning chemical transport network that can handle this in the volume needed with little ramp up. Storage underground in liquid form works well in many locations, but not all.

As for EV's being better for the environment, sure, if you would like to ignore the fact that they destroy every area in the world where the minerals are mined. Ignore that there are more deaths from mining Cobalt than Coal in history and Cobalt has only been mined at this scale for a decade vs centuries for coal. If you ignore recycling of the batteries, the increased stress on the current electrical grid, the fact we don't have enough storage to support off hours use (brown outs during the day are easy to deal with, try it during the night when the supply drops because everyone's EV charger kicks on..

Electricity is not the short term answer until we rethink the grid, bring Nuclear plants online and consider hydraulic storage.

This is just another example of our exalted leaders thinking they know better without actually looking at the impact of what they are demanding from on high.

If EV makes you feel better, I hear that matters in California, than that is fine with me. I'll stick to ICE until this mess all ferrets out.
See less See more
  • Like
Reactions: 2
Well, getting my own electricity off my roof through solar, there is no long term alternative for an EV anymore.

I don't want to give up my independence. It's not simply about the environment. My home set-up frees me from buying fuel from somebody else. I don't want to buy gas and I don't want to buy Hydrogen, either.
  • Like
Reactions: 3
Well, getting my own electricity off my roof through solar, there is no long term alternative for an EV anymore.

I don't want to give up my independence. It's not simply about the environment. My home set-up frees me from buying fuel from somebody else. I don't want to buy gas and I don't want to buy Hydrogen, either.
But you already invested in the generation. I have also, however in FL, I'm sure you know, you must be grid tied. So if FPL goes out, so does our independence. (batteries aside)

This all goes back to what we discussed before, the infra needs to support the solution, not the other way around. Since we don't have a foundation, we can't build this castle quite yet.
  • Like
Reactions: 1
But you already invested in the generation. I have also, however in FL, I'm sure you know, you must be grid tied. So if FPL goes out, so does our independence. (batteries aside)
By "independence", I was referring to the economical aspect. I don't bank on having access to power 24/7/365. Instead, I value the fact that I no longer have to worry if gas is $2, $3, $4 or $6/gallon and/or if Duke Energy suddenly decides to raise their rates by 10%.

It's true that I don't have any power when the grid is down - let's say, after a major hurricane (in the 20 years at my location, the longest period without power was less than 48 hours). The ironic part is though that here in Florida, it is more likely to happen that the gas stations run out of gas prior to a storm than being off grid for a substantial amount of time after a storm.

And without power, does the gas- or hydrogen-pump work?
  • Like
Reactions: 1
And without power, does the gas- or hydrogen-pump work?
That would be station dependent if they have some form of backup system to run the pumps.
That would be station dependent if they have some form of backup system to run the pumps.
I guess if they have one, operation time would be limited.
  • Like
Reactions: 1
Hydrogen fuel is transported and stored as a liquid. There is an already functioning chemical transport network that can handle this in the volume needed with little ramp up. Storage underground in liquid form works well in many locations, but not all.

As for EV's being better for the environment, sure, if you would like to ignore the fact that they destroy every area in the world where the minerals are mined. Ignore that there are more deaths from mining Cobalt than Coal in history and Cobalt has only been mined at this scale for a decade vs centuries for coal. If you ignore recycling of the batteries, the increased stress on the current electrical grid, the fact we don't have enough storage to support off hours use (brown outs during the day are easy to deal with, try it during the night when the supply drops because everyone's EV charger kicks on..

Electricity is not the short term answer until we rethink the grid, bring Nuclear plants online and consider hydraulic storage.

This is just another example of our exalted leaders thinking they know better without actually looking at the impact of what they are demanding from on high.

If EV makes you feel better, I hear that matters in California, than that is fine with me. I'll stick to ICE until this mess all ferrets out.
Coal? Seriously? Coal.
Wow! Thanks for the info on Mustart. I’ve had no problems whatsoever but will look into an alternative.
’ve had no problems whatsoever but will look into an alternative
Most people don't until it tries to burn their vehicle to the ground.
Most people don't until it tries to burn their vehicle and/or house to the ground.
The best part about it trying to burn the house down is that because it isn't ul listed/j1772 compliant, many home owners insurance policies won't cover damage from it.
  • Haha
Reactions: 1
Okay, I’m not trying to start an argument but wanting to get an education. First, my Mustart is clearly marked ETL listed. Both on the part and in all advertising for it. Then off the internet I repeatedly find this or similar statements by various companies:
“UL vs ETL Labels:
The difference between ETL vs UL labels is minimal. In fact, ETL certification follows the same safety standards as Underwriter Laboratories or UL. Whether a product is UL listed or ETL listed, you can be sure that it conforms to high safety standards. The main difference between the two certifications is that UL develops the safety standards it tests to. ETL does not develop its own safety standards. Rather it follows those developed by UL. So, as you can see, both ETL and UL listed mean essentially the same thing.”

Maybe multiple places are in a conspiracy. I don’t know. But bunches of places confirm the above. Please educate.
Second, one thing my experience shows is that all the pictures showing plug damage from the Mustart I would have naturally attributed to a bad connection right at the plug. Any time high amps go through a loose connection heat will be produced by the arcing caused by the plug being loose. Of course, the plug can be mis-sized or have bad connecting material also which can cause resistance. But I suspect in a lot of cases people don’t plug it in all the way or go in crooked and over time cause the arcing of a bad connection. I regularly clean my connectors with Deoxit D100L, because I’m always conscious of high amp plugs. (I have a RV with high amp plugs both DC and AC.) Mine look brand new. Not any sign of discoloration that always precedes resistance. Furthermore the plug is said to be J1772 compliant.
Again, I’m really glad to get this info and am actively looking to change for piece of mind, but anyone who’s an expert please educate. To me it seems being non UL is a non issue because it is ETL.
See less See more
Read the actual linked study in my post above where it was determined that the markings were counterfeit. The specific variant in the study had counterfeit TUV and CE markings.


They claimed j1772 compliance, but they didn't include the ccid circuitry in the product which is a j1772 requirement. The ccid circuitry is what would step in to prevent the over current event that would melt charge port, for example.


The company then claimed that they had fixed it and all future versions were now "lightning stroke proof", an impossibility. The new variants continue to melt charge ports, fry idcms, etc.

It's possible that they have since got their act together, but there is way too many damaged vehicles out there for me to ever risk my money there.
Okay, I’ve read the entire Nissan report. It was 2019 and definitely is not my unit. The report itself says it needs to have either ETL or UL listing. Mine clearly has ETL labeling and has no other labels Nissan complained about. Its specs say it is J1772 compliant with the anti short protector. Since there is a lot of good feedback on Amazon I wonder if it’s possible that Mustart was first in Europe (four or five years ago) and therefore had the European listings but now has got its act together for the US. Just wondering. I’m contacting them and Amazon tomorrow. This needs to be settled. If this is as bad as it seems it could be, then Amazon will be liable once notified. That shouldn’t make them happy.
21 - 40 of 71 Posts
Top