New to wrangler: choose 2.0 or 3.6 for reliability and smooth operation?

[2nd 392]

But we were not talking about a 392 were we? I edited the post because (as you pointed out) I left out 1 word.

With that said, the MPG part would definitely apply to a 392.

Nope, it is correct after I added the 1 word I left out.

Yes; I know--get the torches and pitchforks out because I literally left out 1 word and I was not responding to the OP so there's that.

The second point was conceded

Didn’t get. “one word”, read more posts and now really confused. (Edit- found your edit)

Ford’s new factory tune for 2.3 and 3.0 numbers are good, I haven’t seen a 2.7 tune, available ?
Oh yeah, naturally “ sorry California, not for you” noticed at the end of the article.

Sponsored

 

[Gangplank]

I wish Jeep would bring out a 3.0 turbo 6 cyl. Either gas or diesel.

My BMW 135i had a 3.0 inline 6 with a turbo. It was a great engine 300 HP 325 TQ. That car weighed 3500 lbs. something similar tuned right with an 8 speed transmission would be great.

 

[CarbonSteel]

My experience is my 24 2 door Badlands with a 2.7 and Ford Performance tune (sport mode unlocked) is just a ridiculous fat hog comparing to my '19 2 door 2.0L Rubicon with eTorque and its not even close. My Bronco doesn't build boost worth a shit, doesn't hold boost worth a shit and has an unacceptable delay when starting imo.

For city driving for stop and go traffic Jeep easily takes this especially from the dig. Obviously neither are a racer but needing quick power to the ground to move in and out of rush hour traffic, my Bronco is pretty bad to me. Maybe this is the insane throttle delay or the weight comparing. Maybe I have a boost leak or it's the etorque on my Jeep hitting from the dig. Either way, having had a pentastar on my JK, the 2.0 etorque was only option on my Rubicon when I ordered. Turns out it's been my favorite engine. It wasn't available on the '24 so I grabbed the Bronco to mix it up a bit and specifically choose the 2.7. It was disappointing. Grabbed the FPT. Disappointing, unlocked Sport Mode. Disappointing driving the Jeep and Bronco back to back. Enough where I even ran 0-60 like a weirdo in these.

Sound though.... 2.7 for days lol. Jeep is just more fun for me though they're both good.

How's the 2.0L compare to the 2.0L with etorque? Any dynos out on this anyone has seen?

I've been keeping an eye on the '25 to see if they made any changes to increase performance.

I could say the same (plus much more) about the 3.6L I had. No comparison between it and the 2.7L I have now. Sounds like there is something wrong with your 2.7L--I have no issues building boost.

 

[CarbonSteel]

The second point was conceded

Didn’t get. “one word”, read more posts and now really confused. (Edit- found your edit)

Ford’s new factory tune for 2.3 and 3.0 numbers are good, I haven’t seen a 2.7 tune, available ?
Oh yeah, naturally “ sorry California, not for you” noticed at the end of the article.

There is a Ford Performance tune that moves the 2.7L from 330HP/415TQ to 355HP/433TQ.

 

[Gangplank]

There is a Ford Performance tune that moves the 2.7L from

From here to….

 

[CarbonSteel]

From here to….

Mobile phone post. Now edited.

 

[autotragic]

I could say the same (plus much more) about the 3.6L I had. No comparison between it and the 2.7L I have now. Sounds like there is something wrong with your 2.7L--I have no issues building boost.

I've driven enough 2.7 Ecoboost Ford's to know something is up on his Bronco. None of them I have ever driven had an issue building or holding boost and hauling ass.

 

[CarbonSteel]

I've driven enough 2.7 Ecoboost Ford's to know something is up on his Bronco. None of them I have ever driven had an issue building or holding boost and hauling ass.

1000% - it's why it was an easy choice when I decided to kick the Grinch to the curb. I have seen up to 18PSI on boost and it was definitely hauling ass at that point.

 

[autotragic]

1000% - it's why it was an easy choice when I decided to kick the Grinch to the curb. I have seen up to 18PSI on boost and it was definitely hauling ass at that point.

They aren't called "EgoBoost" for nothin'

 

[2nd 392]

1000% - it's why it was an easy choice when I decided to kick the Grinch to the curb. I have seen up to 18PSI on boost and it was definitely hauling ass at that point.

I have posted a couple times that if I was in the market for a two door it would be a Heritage Bronco due to the 2.7’s power vs Wrangler’s pitiful options.
It even actually reminds me of my 69…… that I wish I still had… see classic car auctions

 

[TheBrandon]

I could say the same (plus much more) about the 3.6L I had. No comparison between it and the 2.7L I have now. Sounds like there is something wrong with your 2.7L--I have no issues building boost.

May be and I need to do a leak test. What is your 0-60? Put it in manual, Sport Mode, 2nd gear launch, move to auto after launching for best time. Watch the tac boost gauge... maybe it's just slow reporting. Even a highway poll is wild. Watch how it damn near takes a half second or longer to engage. I've yet to see a Bronco that doesn't (not counting Raptor). Been a long time so I can't be fair on the V6 on my JK but it was a huge difference with the 2.0. I had heard way back the etorque added 30-40 instant torque. Maybe that is the difference.

I've driven enough 2.7 Ecoboost Ford's to know something is up on his Bronco. None of them I have ever driven had an issue building or holding boost and hauling ass.

Definitely different tunes than the F150 and you'll find the 0-60 times are much better on the F150. I'd love to see low 6s. Unfortunately my 0-60 times align with what I've seen on Youtube. It's chunky af.

 

[TheBrandon]

I have posted a couple times that if I was in the market for a two door it would be a Heritage Bronco due to the 2.7’s power vs Wrangler’s pitiful options.
It even actually reminds me of my 69…… that I wish I still had… see classic car auctions

That's exactly what I ended up doing. Kept the Jeep though (so glad)!

 

[autotragic]

Definitely different tunes than the F150 and you'll find the 0-60 times are much better on the F150. I'd love to see low 6s. Unfortunately my 0-60 times align with what I've seen on Youtube. It's chunky af.

If I had a tuned 2.7 and it couldn't pull a low 6 0-60 I'd be fucking pissed...WTF!?! No wonder you're disappointed holy mother of God. A manual 3.6 Sport can do 0-60 in 6 flat...

 

[Oncorhynchus]

I wish Jeep would bring out a 3.0 turbo 6 cyl. Either gas or diesel.

My BMW 135i had a 3.0 inline 6 with a turbo. It was a great engine 300 HP 325 TQ. That car weighed 3500 lbs. something similar tuned right with an 8 speed transmission would be great.

I have a 24 year old 180 hp inline 6 in my 3200 lb BMW sedan mated to a manual transmission. It still runs like a champ and is a joy to drive.

 

[Pape]

So the consensus is buy a bronco ?

Sponsored