Sponsored

2019 Order Help - Wait for 3.6l BSG? Worth it?

baysta

Active Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2018
Threads
0
Messages
33
Reaction score
9
Location
UT
Vehicle(s)
N/A
I SOOO hope that its true,believe me, I want it!
I'm in the same boat as you, but I'm wondering if people are right and that the 3.6L v6 is the way to go for simplicity's sake when overlanding and what not.
Sponsored

 
OP
OP
0iiiiiii0

0iiiiiii0

Active Member
First Name
Josh
Joined
Oct 22, 2018
Threads
5
Messages
42
Reaction score
47
Location
San Fransisco
Vehicle(s)
89 YJ (sold), 04 Land Rover Disco II (dead), 18 JLU Sport S (granite)
I'm in the same boat as you, but I'm wondering if people are right and that the 3.6L v6 is the way to go for simplicity's sake when overlanding and what not.
I'm with you, and I think I've come to the conclusion that the 3.6L ESS is the best option right now for exactly that. Went and test drove another one today just to be sure. It's great, and I don't think I can go wrong with it. Worse come to worse, if in a few years the BSG or Diesel options are out and proven to be solid and reliable, it justifies selling and getting an upgrade :)
 

Se7enrex

Member
Joined
Oct 22, 2018
Threads
0
Messages
10
Reaction score
4
Location
Denver, CO
Vehicle(s)
s2000, 4runner
I'm in the same boat as you, but I'm wondering if people are right and that the 3.6L v6 is the way to go for simplicity's sake when overlanding and what not.
That's the way I started to feel as well, but imagine dropping the coin on one just to find out that all these new options come out within a couple months, I hate this game, I am waiting.
 

spurly

Well-Known Member
First Name
Zach
Joined
Sep 10, 2018
Threads
11
Messages
812
Reaction score
826
Location
Nebraska
Vehicle(s)
2019 Bright White JLUR
When I'm ready to order a Jeep in the spring, if the 3.6 comes standard with the BSG and there's no option to get the 3.6 without the BSG, I probably won't get a jeep. Seems stupid to let that be the only deciding factor but I have my doubts about the longevity of the BSG. You've now added a 48v battery that I know won't be cheap to replace should it get damaged or depleted. Batteries do have a life expectancy and I'm sure the engineers at FCA have programmed the jeep to NOT operate with a damaged or drained battery. And with the BSG replacing the alternator, I can only speculate the cost to replace it will be outside of warranty will be high. With all that said, I'd strongly consider a 4Runner TRD *gasp* in it's place.
 

Sponsored

viper88

Well-Known Member
First Name
Nick
Joined
Apr 22, 2018
Threads
44
Messages
5,510
Reaction score
5,588
Location
IL
Vehicle(s)
'19 JLR 2.0T (past), '22 JLR 3.6 (present)
Aside from the other reasons mentioned above, I also don't like the idea of having to put premium octane in the 2.0...seems to cut into any real difference in MPG efficiency.
The 2.0 is $1000 option. Not taking the $1000 premium for the 2.0 into consideration. Fuel cost wise on a 2-door its probably close to a wash between a 3.6 running regular gas and a 2.0 running premium gas. It depends on where you live. In the Chicago area premium gas is about 10% more expensive but the 2.0 gets about 10% better gas mpg. Reports of MPG for the larger 4-door is about the same for both engines so no real benefit cost wise. The 2.0 would probably cost a little more to run due to requiring premium gas with the same MPG.

A benefit for the 2-door 2.0 is a little longer driving range between fill ups. A benefit for both the 2-door and 4-door is better high altitude performance from the forced induction of the turbo. The 2.0 feels a little stronger lower in the RPM band because there is a little more useable torque and the 2.0 torque curve is flatter. The power delivery of the 3.6 is more liner. The 2.0 feels a little more agile. Both drive really good.

We are in unchartered territory in terms of the 48v systems. There is truth to the saying less is more or keeping it simple. The 3.6 without the BSG or eTorque is proven and has less components to possible fail. It's probably safe to assume the 3.6 without BSG is the most reliable option today simply because there is less to possibly go wrong. Not to say the the 2.0 is not as reliable it's just new and unproven. The 2.0 has a lot of new technology and additional cooling components for the 48v battery. The eTorque battery is also expensive to replace if warranty does not cover it. The eTorque 48v battery is about $1500 today. I have no idea how long the 48v battery is covered for under the factory warranty? Or if it is covered under the Factory Extended FCA warranty?

There might not be a choice in the future because it looks like the the 3.6 will eventually have eTorque in the near future. Hopefully parts for eTorque will come down once the technology matures. Many other car companies are using the 48v hybrid technology.

https://jalopnik.com/everything-you-need-to-know-about-the-upcoming-48-volt-1790364465
 

WXman

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 1, 2017
Threads
61
Messages
2,855
Reaction score
3,076
Location
Central Kentucky
Vehicle(s)
2018 Wrangler Unlimited
Occupation
Meteorology and Transportation
Even if the 3.6L gets eTorque, it still won't have forced induction or direct injection or the other over complicated stuff the 2.0L has. So, it will always be the most reliable and dependable powertrain option for JL.

The shame of it all is that domestic automakers would have never dreamed of switching to tiny displacement turbo engines with a rat nest of batteries, hoses, and wiring on their own. This all precipitated from the ridiculous CAFE mandates of the Obama era.

When the Pentastar engine goes away one day, it'll likely be my last Jeep.
 

Kent5

Well-Known Member
First Name
Kent
Joined
Oct 14, 2018
Threads
5
Messages
106
Reaction score
127
Location
Las Vegas, NV
Vehicle(s)
1999 TJ Sport
Occupation
Tech
Even if the 3.6L gets eTorque, it still won't have forced induction or direct injection or the other over complicated stuff the 2.0L has. So, it will always be the most reliable and dependable powertrain option for JL.

(snip)
eTorque on the 3.6 would have almost all the added complexities of the 2.0T except the turbocharger -- because of the required 48v battery, it will still have the added heater lines, the whole additional stand-alone cooling system, the dedicated computer module(s), more complex powertrain electronics, etc. (DI itself really isn't more complex than port injection -- just a higher-psi fuel pump and beefier lines feeding the in-combustion-chamber injectors).

Similar to you, I'm NOT looking forward to the day when all Wrangler engines are so over-complicated just to eke out another MPG or two (thanks EPA!). For me, the current non-eTorque 3.6 VVT is the best engine for a Wrangler. I am hopeful for the diesel, and that Jeep sees fit to offer it in the 2-door at some point. At about 175lbs more than the 3.6L, it is def heavier, but it seems manageable enough to make it a viable option. I do rather wish Jeep had pursued a 4cyl diesel option instead of the 3.0L V6 -- would still have plenty of torque for a relatively lightweight Wrangler, and without as much added weight.
 
Last edited:

InvertedLogic

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2018
Threads
12
Messages
592
Reaction score
542
Location
Denver, CO
Vehicle(s)
20 JTR
After test driving 5 Different jeeps from Rubicons to Saharas with 3.6 and 2.0 Turbo, I can confidently say that the 3.6 felt awkward, and misplaced in the jeep. First off, It made the entire vehicle feel heavy, stiff, and tough to manuver. Getting on the highway it took far to long to get the power I needed to successfully merge into traffic. Stop/Start with this engine was loud, rough, and laggy on take off. I have no experience with the 6 speed manual, so that might be a different story. From what I gathered on all my different examples is that the 2.0 Turbo was extremely smooth in all aspects, city and highway and effortlessly operated the engine stop/start feature. It was bearly noticeable and power was instant on take off and through the mid rpms. Zero lag from a Stop Start Situation. By the end of my drives I had not noticed that the stop start had occurred until the engine turned back on (which it did quietly). These reasons are why I personally believe the 2.0 is a better engine in this platform and the way to go unless you are holding out for a diesel. My 2019 JLUR Mojito is going to have the 2.0 and I'm extremely excited to be able to drive it everyday.
Funny I had nearly the exact opposite experience. I drove similarly optioned Rubicons back to back with the 2.0L and the 3.6L. Here's some observations of mine:
  • The 2.0L is quicker than the 3.6L, but it wasn't a drastic change. At atltitude (5600ft) both hit 65mph somewhere between 1/2-3/4 the length of the on ramp. The 3.6L was still able to chirp tires leaving a red light with the auto.
  • The 2.0L sounds and feels rougher than the V6 which feels significantly smoother. Also seems like the trans tuning was much better matched with the V6. Overall just felt more refined. I was able to trick the 2.0L+8spd a couple of times and it guessed its gear incorrectly and had to shift again.
  • Start/Stop was rougher with the 3.6 than the 2.0 which felt near invisible. Still not too bad.
  • 3.6L sounds smoother and less thrashy than the 2.0. But this is just personal opinion.
I was originally set on the turbo, but after driving both I'm ordering the V6. I am no turbo hater either, I am so happy it is an option for the Jeep. But compared to the 2.5L in my Subaru, it seems like it needs more refinement before I'd buy it. I bet a tune would help tremendously with shift points.
 

Sponsored

Snowjeep

Well-Known Member
First Name
Alex
Joined
Jun 20, 2018
Threads
0
Messages
59
Reaction score
78
Location
Seattle
Vehicle(s)
2010 Honda Ridgeline
The eTorque 48v battery is about $1500 today. I have no idea how long the 48v battery is covered for under the factory warranty? Or if it is covered under the Factory Extended FCA warranty?
I'm not sure where you got $1500 for a battery replacement when the whole system itself is less than that. I'm guessing a replacement battery for this woudn't run more than about $200 at the most.
 

Kent5

Well-Known Member
First Name
Kent
Joined
Oct 14, 2018
Threads
5
Messages
106
Reaction score
127
Location
Las Vegas, NV
Vehicle(s)
1999 TJ Sport
Occupation
Tech
I'm not sure where you got $1500 for a battery replacement when the whole system itself is less than that. I'm guessing a replacement battery for this woudn't run more than about $200 at the most.
From another thread here on the JLWfourm:

48V Battery Assembly, PN 68381513AA, $1565

Knowing how pricey factory parts are, I'm thinking even just the 48v battery skidplate would be $200... lol
 

viper88

Well-Known Member
First Name
Nick
Joined
Apr 22, 2018
Threads
44
Messages
5,510
Reaction score
5,588
Location
IL
Vehicle(s)
'19 JLR 2.0T (past), '22 JLR 3.6 (present)
Last edited:

DocTwinkie

Well-Known Member
First Name
George
Joined
Aug 19, 2018
Threads
33
Messages
496
Reaction score
589
Location
Ohio
Vehicle(s)
2020 JLUR 3.6m, 2019 Acura RDX Adv.
Occupation
Doc... Duh.
I’m personally glad to see them pushing the MPG. I’m with the epa on this one. Ya know. Global warming and all that.

I want to build the most fuel efficient rig that can still do what I want it to. I’m willing to pay a premium not to be a complete environmental a$$.

That said I’m not very happy with the bsg options. They add very little mileage which I’d be okay with if not for the dizzying complexity. There’s a very high cost of entry, cost of upkeep, and cost of fuel with the 2.0. The 3.5 only takes away the fuel part. And for a tiny gain. I wonder if i could put that money towards aluminum bumpers and skids and get a similar MPG on the 3.6 ESS.

Also if I’m giving up a manual which I reeeeeealy want then it better be for something good.

I would much rather pay the premium for the diesel assuming it’s going to get high 20s or wishfully thinking low 30s or the plug in. At least the plug in will be time tested from the Pacifica and give you a meaningful MPG boost.

I purchase mine at the end of 2019 so we will see what’s available then. Right now I love the Jeep but can’t say I’m loving the engine options. If I had to choose I’d go 3.6 and shed as much weight as I can and drive with a light foot.
 

Snowjeep

Well-Known Member
First Name
Alex
Joined
Jun 20, 2018
Threads
0
Messages
59
Reaction score
78
Location
Seattle
Vehicle(s)
2010 Honda Ridgeline
Someone in another thread posted the part number. Here is the 48v battery, part #68381513AA…$1565 list price. Plus extra cost for hazardous materials shipping.

https://www.getoemparts.com/oem-parts/mopar-battery-assembly-68381513aa?c=az0x
Thanks for posting that. Maybe it's just me but doesn't it strike you as odd that the FCA only charges $1000 for the BSG on a Wrangler ($1500 on a Ram truck) but replacement for the battery is as much or more than the whole BSG system new? That just doesn't make sense to me.

I'm not particularly excited by the BSG system coming. I would also be curious to know how much weight that system adds to the JL?
Sponsored

 
 



Top