Terrible 2.0 gas mileage?

[pablo_max3045]

It takes X amount of fuel to make Y amount of power.

In absolute terms, just so.
However most gasoline combustion engines average around 20 percent thermal efficiency. That's actually kinda crap.
This means it is certainly possible via engineering to deliver massively higher performance figures while keeping a small displacement engine.
Easy? No. Cheap? Nope. Likely they can already make an engine that is way more efficient, but we probably could not afford to actually buy it.
Given the current price of petroleum relative to the performance of the average car, the balance still works for most folks.
But hey... we won't even get to argue about it too much longer anyhow. Whether we like it or not, this is likely to be the last non-electric Wrangler generation.
Though, I would not mind one with a gas turbine generator and an electric motor at each wheel.

Sponsored

 

[suzookus]

After 500 miles of all city driving. A lot in rush hour to the train station. I’m getting 17.1 mpg. I typically turn off the auto off as well. (2.0 turbo 4 on 35s). I’m pretty happy with the results.

 

[yell03]

How do you like it? I assume you mean the F150 version? We can get the Ranger raptor here, but not F150 at all. Too big for our roads in any case. The Ranger I think is a 2.2L Bi-Turbo which is supposed to be cracking engine.

Don't have a F Type, but our Jag XF sportbrake returns about 45 MPG on the highway. My wife is pushing for a convertible F-Type.

I have the F150 Supercrew.
Like you said , LARGE!!!!
21' of truck and the extra width makes all parking an adventure.
I love how it drives, but I do not like worrying about if there is available parking.
Regular driving the size doesn't bother me and it is fast for 6000lbs, but the Jeep feels so spunky and nimble for daily driving.
Personally, I like driving the Rubicon better, but I will admit on the beach, where I use my vehicles off-road, the Raptor is better.
Highway driving, it is better than the Jeep, but I love the Jeep.
Both vehicles have their pros and cons, but I would sell the Raptor first if given a choice.

 

[Demonic]

The moment that turbo spools, your fuel savings is gone. Turbo's are not great for mileage, they're only good when they're not on.

I respectfully disagree. It's the opposite that occurs. A turbo is a means for increasing volumetric efficiency. At low RPMs when the turbo isn't spooling the turbine becomes a flow restriction. At high rpms the turbo housing becomes a restriction and the turbine is no longer able to spin fast enough to increase the volume of air moved through the housing. Jeep and other manufacturers used a small turbo so that it's basically spooled coming off idle, but then becomes a restriction at higher RPM's. I'm not surprised that someone would get poor mileage going over 75mph in the turbo. I'm usually going 60mph on the highway, and my overall mileage is about 21mpg.

 

[Spartan99]

That tiny 2.0 must have to spool up pretty hard to get that thing to go that fast. 13mpg to get a four door Jeep to go that fast is pretty good when you think about it. CJ, YJ and TJ probably would get 8 mpg at those speeds.

 

[Maverick909]

i'd like to stay my stock sport with the 3.6L and the 6spd my first week owning the jeep i took it on a 300 mile trip. 100 of that in the dirt my trip i averaged 21.5 over the full trip. that was highway speeds at 65-75 mph

 

[TJ2018]

I have the 2.0 JLUR (stock setup) and the last fill-up was 21.2 MPG (per Fuelly) with mixed driving, the on board computer was reading 22.2. It's only my first fill cycle with Fuelly so I don't have a previous history... expect that to by pretty typical. As others have said, once you get above 65 mileage noticeably declines. Started using Fuelly thinking that the JL was hyper-exaggerating the mileage... but it's only +5%. Once this little Fuelly experiment is done I'll have a better feel for how accurate the on board mileage figures are.

What IS unusual with the 2.0 (compared to all previous vehicles) is I can get the similar MPG in city as on the highway... schmaybe 1 or 2 mpg less but it's not a drastic difference like all other vehicles I've owned. Sometimes it seems like it's better on the city than the hwy. Then again I have a conservative right foot. But this is far better than I'd hoped for a shoe-box on steroids.

All I know for sure is I'm happy with the mileage I'm getting!!!

 

[Patinito]

if you want more gas mileage take off those pesky doors and stupid roof.

 

[Currentg]

On my 3.6L the worst I have gotten is 18.93 mpg in the city. Mixed I get 21-22 mpg and on the highway I have gotten as high as 26. My secret? Cruise control set at 65.

 

[pablo_max3045]

Jeep and other manufacturers used a small turbo so that it's basically spooled coming off idle, but then becomes a restriction at higher RPM's.

This is certainly the case when variable geometry turbos are not used.
Another solution, as Ford has done on the Ranger Rapter is to use a bi-turbo. Basically, a big one and a small one.
It is possible to get a metric crap-tone of power out of a 2L engine. It is not unusual to greater than 350HP from a 2L.
My friend has WRX which is built up for racing. Sequential shifting and all the rest of it. That 2L puts out some stupid power and it doesnt matter when you stomp on the gas, it kicks you in the butt.
Granted, the first setup has really, really bad turbo lag so you had to keep it spooled, otherwise a kia would beat round the track.
Some makers also use a turbo and a super charger.
I would expect to see the aftermarket putting out something like that for Jeeps. I personally would never in a million years trust a Fiat engine enough to toss a supercharger on there and expect it to last more than 1000 miles, but that's just me.

 

[pablo_max3045]

if you want more gas mileage take off those pesky doors and stupid roof.

That color is great!
Sadly, we cannot get that color here.

 

[rodhotter]

you bought a porky box + put your foot in the tank so thats what it is. when you step on it the turbo boosts pushing in more air + the injectors squirt more fuel so you don't burn a hole in your pistons. any turbo'd vehicle can get better mpg's IF you drive it conservatively + push the pedal softly + not too far as that changes the programming in the ECU

 

[FUHL]

My 2 dr Sport with cruise on @ 65 is running 1600-1700 rpm. 22=23 MPG with 32" tires and recalibrated,
With a heavier 4 dr and 4:10 gears I'm guessing you are at or over 2000 rpm at that same speed. Add a heavy foot and a trans that has learned to shift at a higher rpm, and the engine is not broke in yet.........and I would say its feasible to to be in the 13 mpg range. I have been as low as 18 mpg.......if I had 2 more doors and the lower rubicon gears, I'd likely be closer to 14 with a heavy foot.

I have a 2-door Rubicon. My RPM at 65 is around 1,750- 1,800. I average 19.2.

 

[FUHL]

To the OP. Check the vacuum lines to the aircleaner, someone posted that they had disconnected and was getting poor fuel mileage.

 

[MOPAR Boy]

whoops

Sponsored