3.6L vs 2.0 turbo?? Pros and cons of both??

[AnnDee4444]

Which is why the 2.0 is not offered in the JT.

I wasn't aware that FCA gave a reason for why the 2.0 isn't offered in the JT. Do you have any links that show this?

Sponsored

 

[Cartage1]

Fortunate enough to have both.., 2018 six cyl, and a 2020 two litre..., both are good, completely different experiences though. The 2.0 is quick, and great fuel econ, but the six sounds way better..., not V-8 good, but better.... I cannot vote.., like them both, and each for different reasons.. Wish I had a diesel to really test out the power plant line up.....Whichever you buy, just enjoy it. Drive each and make your own call..., more excited to see if they can bolt that V-8 in there. Had a 76 CJ-5 with a 360, and while on old dog, still nice to have a brute under the hood. Damn thing would rip the rear tires loose in the rain in 2nd gear every time it rained..., that was too much motor for that small of a truck.

 

[JEB-A-RONI]

You do not need to use premium gas on the 2.0L.

Really? I thought I saw somewhere you had to.

 

[JEB-A-RONI]

Fortunate enough to have both.., 2018 six cyl, and a 2020 two litre..., both are good, completely different experiences though. The 2.0 is quick, and great fuel econ, but the six sounds way better..., not V-8 good, but better.... I cannot vote.., like them both, and each for different reasons.. Wish I had a diesel to really test out the power plant line up.....Whichever you buy, just enjoy it. Drive each and make your own call..., more excited to see if they can bolt that V-8 in there. Had a 76 CJ-5 with a 360, and while on old dog, still nice to have a brute under the hood. Damn thing would rip the rear tires loose in the rain in 2nd gear every time it rained..., that was too much motor for that small of a truck.

I agree the 3.6 sounds much better

 

[Notorious]

On paper, there’s a difference. Behind the wheel, those differences shrink. Get what’s good to you.

 

[rubileon]

Had a 76 CJ-5 with a 360, and while on old dog, still nice to have a brute under the hood. Damn thing would rip the rear tires loose in the rain in 2nd gear every time it rained..., that was too much motor for that small of a truck.

Not difficult to lose traction in 2nd in the rain for either the 3.6 JK or the JL (any of them except maybe the 2.2 diesel). Traction control being on is what stops it from happening.

With a supercharger on, you don't need rain. There are a few ways to get it done without a V8 but nothing like naturally aspirated reliable power and sound.

And now a public safety announcement: Drive safe everyone. Don't play with anyone's lives including your own.

 

[aldo98229]

I wasn't aware that FCA gave a reason for why the 2.0 isn't offered in the JT. Do you have any links that show this?

JT weighs about 500-600 lbs more than JL. Online reviews describe the 3.6 V6 as barely adequate on JT.

Turbos are notorious for giving up their efficiency benefits the moment you lay on the boost.

My guess is JT would keep the 2.0T on boost the whole time; more so with a load in the back, which would render the 2.0T’s MPG advantage a moot point.

 

[rubileon]

JT weighs about 500-600 lbs more than JL. Online reviews describe the 3.6 V6 as barely adequate on JT.

Turbos are notorious for giving up their efficiency benefits the moment you lay on the boost.

My guess JT would keep the 2.0T on boost the whole time; more so with a load in the back, which would render the 2.0T’s MPG advantage a moot point.

Being always on boost also means increased overall stress on the cylinders. Increased pressure at low RPMs are known to mess lifters, rods, etc. too.

I've heard the supercharged engines (positive displacement ones) often make less top end power than what the same engine can with turbos because the engine is at its limit in the down low with the supercharger. Turbos and centrifugals have that pronounced non-linear boost curve that brings the boost in the higher rpms where the engine can make use of it. Or there abouts.

 

[DaltonGang]

I want a Hemi Wrangler. Screw the 3.6, screw the 2.0, double screw the ESS, and their duel batteries. I just want a 5.7 or 6.4 Hemi, I'm not picky, just no ESS.

 

[Windshieldfarmer]

Both good choices. If you drive at altitude, the 2.0 is WAY better than the 3.6 however. I also like the ETorque in my 2.0 Recon.

 

[BrntWS6]

I wasn't aware that FCA gave a reason for why the 2.0 isn't offered in the JT. Do you have any links that show this?

Just from reading on the JT forum and articles on the gladiator regarding towing and engine temps according to FCA reps.

I'm sure you can find the same information from a simple search.

 

[zrickety]

I've read the 2021 may offer a 2.0 with the manual. I can't confirm this will happen, but it would be a nice option. I drove both at the dealer, the 2.0 turbo is a good motor and it impressed. But my heart was set on the 3.6 manual that I drove 8 hours to buy. I don't know how that 4 will compare to say my Volkswagen GTI 2.0 turbo, but the car has 180k and runs really strong. YMMV.

 

[rubileon]

Screw the 3.6

Some people do...

 

[cosine]

Yes that is one thing I don't look forward to. As much as I would like auto windows and locks and what not, more tech just means more things to break and pay for down the road. And dealerships are just money pits charging an arm and a leg.

i said to myself that the next vechile will not have all the bells and whistles. infact, i was at the point that i would get a cj 7 or scrambler. however my last ride (07 grand cherokee) took a dump earlier that expected, plus some of the options was crapping out and starting to cost me in repairs. so the cj idea when out the window. i test drove a jlu sport s with a bunch of options that i didnt care for. at one point i told the sales lady to just stop yapping all the options. the jlu was nice and all except the $47k out the door price.

i sat down and looked at all the models jl and options. i then built one the way i wanted in both 2 and 4 door version. what i ended up getting was a 2 door jl sport base model with only 4 options which were 8 spd auto, hard top, a/c, and xm radio. that was it. i got lucky that a dealer 20 miles from me has one right down to the granite color. test drove it and came home with it that day. yes, its my daily driver and have taken it on a couple of road trips. so i have no regrets or second thought on the purchase.

my buddies thought i was crazy to down size and grade from my past ride. to be honest, i love it. i love the fact that i have to crank the windows or manually lock the doors. i just like the simplier thing in a jeep and not have to worry about any "options" that could crap out. its going to be a long term ownership. so the simple setup means low budget, maintenance jeep.

 

[Headbarcode]

People on here will tell you the 3.6L is more reliable because it's "tried and true". What they leave out is the 3.6L had a major re-design in 2016 to get better fuel economy. To do this they went low friction by narrowing many of the bearings and going to a high compression low friction ring design. They also made the engine much lighter weight. These changes are substantial and therefore no "high mileage" examples to really see how they will do. We do know this modernized 2016 version has pre-ignition issues due to the high compression on lower octane fuel (particularly in higher temperatures), and also plagued by ESS problems with the dual battery setup and firmware around that (this one might be fixed now).

While the 2.0L has a turbo that is not new technology and should not worry you. A modern turbo with ball bearings/ceramic construction has no issues going several hundred thousand miles - and do in many different vehicles include large commercial trucks and the Ford EcoBoost trucks. The 2.0L was released in 2016 in the Alfa's so about as old as the current 3.6L.

I'd personally went 2.0L as you get better fuel economy and much better power especially if you live at higher altitudes.

It's refreshing to finally read something that more reality based, rather than what was uttered when being bounced on grandpa's knee.

Also it must be added that, in this modern day, mechanical component failure is more common than that of the electronic variety.

Generally speaking, a motor and all of its parts will begin on the road to inevitable failure as soon as it gets put to use. Its unavoidable because the collection of so many individual pieces having to work in near perfect concert with each other in a very violent atmosphere. The fact that this violence is steadily increased over the years, all while maintaining or enhancing longevity, is a huge credit to modern manufacturing.

Electronics on the other hand, are much more reliable and last considerably longer. Generally speaking, if a component is problem free after the first 6 months than its going to go the distance. At that point only physical damage will end it early.

It could very easily be argued that the higher number of mechanical parts would make the v6 more "over complicated" than the inline 4.

Sponsored