Axle Info: NEW Front and Rear Axles for 2018 JL Wrangler Sport, Sahara & Rubicon

[digitalbliss]

No one has lowered the bar dude. You keep saying that. What is lower on the JL than the JK? And don't compare a JKRR to a JLR. They are different trim levels and are offered at different price points.

Sponsored

 

[word302]

We don't even know where the bar is yet.

 

[Billy]

We don't even know where the bar is yet.

I know where the bar is...

 

[The Great Grape Ape]

Yeah, it is all about torque, which is why people who know that, especially Jeepers, repeat it.
It is also why that's the rating that's used for capabilities by manufacterers, and the aspect they focus on, and why the impact of the 60+% improvement in torque from the EcoDiesel determines/requires a separate Transmission just for the diesel, and is what also keeps it from getting the manual transmission , despite having 45-65 HP gulf between current EcoDiesel and the higher HP Pentastar.

The multiplier effect of gears is based on the torque which is why you see that in the input/output torque numbers for the axle or transmission handling capabilities are measured (and branded by) their capabilities in NM, not in HP/KW.

If I have more HP, I can put more torque than you on the pavement by proper gearing - simple as that.

You've got that back to front, HP is an output function of torque, not vice versa. Torque can be the same from 2,000 RPM to 6,000 RPM, but that HP starts low and only increase with large changes in RPM
That's why no one cares about the JK's max HP at 6,400 RPM and it only having less than 33% HP at 2K RPM, but they do care that at that same 2,000 RPM it generates more than 95% of it's torque. Early on torque delivery of the engine is important to the trail activities of the Wrangler, not HP which is a function of Torque and RPM... to which..

Of course if your Recon never leaves the pavement, then yeah, maybe HP would be your focus.

Either way, at launch, the JL Rubicon will provide minimal, if any, increase in either torque or HP over the JK (though the 8A transmission should help).

Since you don't know the Pentastar numbers, let alone the Hurricane numbers you don't know any of that. Could it possibly be more than 3% different? Cause as you pointed out earlier that's HUGE !!!

The current diesel brings well over 60% improvement in torque which is a long way from the zero you claim, and the new diesel will be aiming to keep up or surpass the new Ford diesel which would be over 70% increase over the current Pentastar, or in your terms, almost double, and must qualify for Mega Awesome OMG 'Uge !!!

As for the rest, you can backtrack it however you want just like earlier, but thinking that it's about fanboism (of torque over HP?) for focusing on one or the other for specific capabilities/activities/tasks is ignorant of how BOTH affect the performance of the Wrangler under different scenarios (like HP's focus on aerodynamics and efficiency), claiming otherwise is trying to hide your ignorance of that fact.

 

[The Great Grape Ape]

I, for one, vote before you guys sidetrack this anymore, take this crap to PM.
You do realize this is an axle thread, right?

That's my last post addressing B95, my posts were directly in relationship with the axle's capabilities, and posting simply what we do know including Dana's own information in addition to the Admin's, and countering the hysterical guessing game.

Posting FUD about the bar being lowered or things being weaker before we get any more actual facts about what will actually be in the JL(U) is ridiculous fear-mongering.

 

[word302]

The importance of torque is why the 4L inline reigned supreme for as long as it did.

 

[WXman]

The importance of torque is why the 4L inline reigned supreme for as long as it did.

Unfortunately, the 4.0 had no torque (only 230ish lbs/ft) and leaked oil like a sieve, was heavy, slow, and drank fuel like it was sponsored by OPEC in addition to eating crank sensors like candy and having heads that cracked between cylinder #2 and #3. The fact that the 4.0 was a "legendary" engine in it's time is only testament to how pathetic domestic engines were back then. Good riddance.

It's funny when people say "torque matters" when the Wrangler has NEVER had a torquey engine option in it's entire lifespan in the U.S. Ever. Even in the CJ days the 304 V8 was miserable.

 

[Billy]

My 20 year old 4.0 has never had any of those problems. Other than the OPEC support...

Not that I want to see it reintroduced.

 

[WXman]

My 20 year old 4.0 has never had any of those problems. Other than the OPEC support...

Not that I want to see it reintroduced.

You should buy a lottery ticket, because in the last 25 years I've never once seen a 4.0L engine that didn't have oil leaking out of the head gasket area and a litany of repairs over time to keep it on the road.

I will say though, the Cash for Clunkers program that the government did several years ago wiped a lot of them out that were still decent running vehicles. It was kind of sad.

Anyway... back to axles... yes the JL has all new axles which sux because that means aftermarket support has to start all over again.

 

[AZCrawl]

Hi all,

The new JLU will be my first Jeep, so I am getting pretty excited!

I know information is scarce, but do you think that the axles slated for the Rubicon are Dana 44's or something different?

JL Rubicon (standard)
Dana M210 Wide Front Axle / Dana M220 Wide Rear Axle

I searched around trying to find information on these, and found it interesting that Yukon Gear has different listings for Dana 44's and these M210 and M220 axles.

https://www.ringpinion.com/b2c/partcats.aspx?SearchMode=Brand&BrandID=24

It looks like these axles were used in the 2015 Canyon and Colorado trucks made by GM.

https://www.yukongear.com/diffdetails.aspx?DiffID=352&PartsLink=PartCats.aspx?SearchMode=Diff&TypeID=3&Type=Dana&DiffID=352&DiffName=Dana+M220

Picture 4 may be a picture of the new rear axle for the JL.

http://www.fourwheeler.com/vehicle-...eneration-2015-chevy-colorado-and-gmc-canyon/

So my question is based on this information, do you think the axles will technically be Dana 44's at all?

 

[The Great Grape Ape]

So my question is based on this information, do you think the axles will technically be Dana 44's at all?

NO, that’s why they are named differently. The Sport and non select-trac Sahara will have a Dana 44 rear, and a new (NOT D30) front.
The Slect-Trac Sahara and Rubicon JLs will have both new front and rear axles as mentioned in the first post in this thread.

 

[AZCrawl]

NO, that’s why they are named differently. The Sport and non select-trac Sahara will have a Dana 44 rear, and a new (NOT D30) front.
The Slect-Trac Sahara and Rubicon JLs will have both new front and rear axles as mentioned in the first post in this thread.

Ok, thanks for the confirmation.

 

[wanderer]

But will the new ones be stronger .? They would have to right ? To handle the diesels higher torque. And what ever the turbo actually comes in at? What about the t case and gearing. Do you think the nrubicon willstill get a 4:1. With 410 gears? Or if they are Colorado axels will they those ratios?

Sponsored