Jeep Wrangler JL/JLU EcoDiesel First Drive Reviews and Performance Specs

[Odyssey USA]

https://www.lloyds.com/news-and-risk-insight/risk-reports/library/natural-environment/solar-storm

Carrington-level CME risk is ~50% in any 80 year period. An eventual guarantee for which we are woefully unprepared and completely dependent on Chinese replacement transformers. People with their own wind/solar supplies might do OK assuming their own equipment isn’t fried too.

Neither of which I would depend on personally. I didn’t have that risk in mind btw but thanks.

Sponsored

 

[KIVO]

Funny to see you folks now finally get a diesel, and a nice one, whilst we now suddenly have to make do with the small 2.2T only, whereas we used to have the JK with the 2.8NA diesel (which I owned previously). The effect of the witch hunt on "big" engines in the EU...

 

[Kaliks&Bones]

I just need to know if it’s going to spin heavy 37s even better than my 3.6? Which I get 17mpg in already. If so I’ll buy one when they have Gobi, Gator, or Sarge available. Not too worried about the rest.

 

[Andy-jr.]

I just need to know if it’s going to spin heavy 37s even better than my 3.6? Which I get 17mpg in already. If so I’ll buy one when they have Gobi, Gator, or Sarge available. Not too worried about the rest.

17 MPG with 37's is nice! I'm running 37's on my 3.6 with 4.88 gears and get 14.

 

[digitalbliss]

17 MPG with 37's is nice! I'm running 37's on my 3.6 with 4.88 gears and get 14.

My Jeep is reading 16-17 with my 35s but I haven't updated my speedo yet.

 

[rubileon]

Turbocharging is the equivalent of displacement on demand.

No. "On demand" suggests that a turbo engine can also behave like a big displacement engine at low rpms which it can't.

A bigger engine will make more power without you having to worry about fuel quality or octane ratings. There's less pressure, pressure differential, heat, heat differential inside the cylinder and therefore it is logically and practically more reliable. Material and fault tolerance technology used for turbos can be used for N/A engines also.

If you're racing, a turbo no doubt. If you want to keep going no matter what, a N/A engine is better.

 

[Odyssey USA]

No. "On demand" suggests that a turbo engine can also behave like a big displacement engine at low rpms which it can't.

A bigger engine will make more power without you having to worry about fuel quality or octane ratings. There's less pressure, pressure differential, heat, heat differential inside the cylinder and therefore it is logically and practically more reliable. Material and fault tolerance technology used for turbos can be used for N/A engines also.

If you're racing, a turbo no doubt. If you want to keep going no matter what, a N/A engine is better.

You got me...but I suspect you know what I meant. Turbocharging doesn’t work that way. I don’t need to write a paper because I assume there’s a level of mechanical aptitude and understanding here. It’s a very old and extremely simple analogy comparing “power” output at cruise vs full throttle of a smaller engine to a NA engine of larger displacement and that’s all it was intended to be.

Yes the tuning “window” is larger and more forgiving NA. You’re preaching to the choir. I went to, formerly, S.A.M. (Now Samtech) and I’m a former F-16 crew chief so I’d hope I’m reasonably competent. The school was an NA proponent and it’s what they primarily teach. 1000+ hp 420+ cubic inch NA LS is an engine they field. Between the tuning window and simplicity for a mass produced several thousand mile lasting engine, I’d also give the edge to NA there. That said, given the massive control and fallibility of electronics, if any of those were to fail, they would both run improperly. If both are properly maintained and completely stock, my opinion is that the difference becomes negligible.

 

[KIVO]

I just need to know if it’s going to spin heavy 37s even better than my 3.6? Which I get 17mpg in already. If so I’ll buy one when they have Gobi, Gator, or Sarge available. Not too worried about the rest.

My guess that will depend on where - I.e. in which situation - you want to spin them even better. Whilst rock crawling, or whilst accelerating on the freeway? Off road, my guess the 3.0D will overclass the 3.6. A diesel, in particular a big one, can be impressively strong from idle rpm on. I had my old 2.8NA tuned to 230Hp/520nm, and that thing preformed extremely well - this engine should do even way better, run smoother.

 

[JLUfan]

Love everything about it but without a manual transmission I’m out. Would love to see them at least put 6MT with the gas turbo 4. No excuse there as it could handle the torque, and in Rubicon eTorque is out of the way. Most rumors say Ford is having Getrag design a 7MT for bronco with cool turbo engines. Hope FCA tries to keep up.

 

[Crux]

I think this will be a short- lived production run, due to the impending extinction of diesels for emissions penalties. They are being banned in many cities, and the expense getting them to pass emissions, and still perform as advertised has been a painful process.
As a niche vehicle, for military and off-road use, the torque numbers are fabulous. Overlanders will like this, 500 miles to a tank of fuel...
The electric drive train will deliver the torque, battery technology is advancing fast, electric pickups are in the near term, so this will probably be a short term run, in my opinion.
Now, about that electric Wrangler...

Please watch this and then tell me why it’s a good idea to hold out for an EV wrangler?



Assuming you off-road, I mean.

 

[SecondTJ]

Would love to see them at least put 6MT with the gas turbo 4. No excuse there as it could handle the torque.

How so? The 2.0’s 295 lb/ft exceeds the torque capacity of JL’s Aisin transmission.

 

[JLUfan]

How so? The 2.0’s 295 lb/ft exceeds the torque capacity of JL’s Aisin transmission.

My bad. I misread a post on page 1, and thought the limit was 370, but that’s NM, only 273 lb ft.

I therefore revise my plea and wish they would “beef up” (Mike Manley’s words at JL intro 2 years ago referring to the diesel version of the auto) the 6MT to be suitable for the better engines. If a 6 or 7 MT can fit in a Porsche, Vette, or Mustang and take the torque, there is no excuse here.

 

[rommel102]

So burning 30% less fossil fuels and producing CO2 emissions on par with an electric vehicle running on the US power grid, all while conforming to the lunacy of modern NOx and particulate emissions is neither eco nor clean? We truly live in a post-truth world.

The part where you claim they actually conform to NOx emissions is where I call bullshit.

How many auto companies were found to be scamming the tests? How many fail to live up to spec under real world conditions?

There is a reason that even Diesel-crazy Europe is moving hard away from Diesel. Just like "clean coal" the entire concept is just marketing. Throw in the issues with short-cycle regen and Diesel is not worth the cost at all.

EV is the future.

BTW, I get 24mpg with the Turbo 4 currently.

 

[Odyssey USA]

I think hybrid is as good as it’ll get but FCA is onto something with the generator driven (very smooth) start stop in conjunction with reclaiming what would have been wasted mechanical energy as a result of the combustion process.

 

[JLURD]

The part where you claim they actually conform to NOx emissions is where I call bullshit.

How many auto companies were found to be scamming the tests? How many fail to live up to spec under real world conditions?

There is a reason that even Diesel-crazy Europe is moving hard away from Diesel. Just like "clean coal" the entire concept is just marketing. Throw in the issues with short-cycle regen and Diesel is not worth the cost at all.

EV is the future.

BTW, I get 24mpg with the Turbo 4 currently.

With upper management serving prison terms, and after losing billions in fines/sales revenue, you think these companies are still trying to pull off dynamic tunes to cheat the regs in real world driving? Amazing. Nearly all of the statist west is marching toward blanket bans of ICE vehicles, gas included, so singling out diesel is a bit myopic as it pertains to regulatory trends. I find it fascinating how people are willing to lap up what a bunch of unelected/unaccountable hacks tell them is great for the environment. Go ahead and enjoy your 2.0’s CO2 production, but don’t justify it by pretending the 3.0’s environmental impact is somehow worse. Just curious, how many kids do you have?

Sponsored