2.0 turbo vs Pentastar V6

[brow]

My thoughts are the 2.0L upgrade cost doesn't offset any fuel savings. 3.6L is great, that's what I went with.

Sponsored

 

[akmuddy]

I went through this discussion in my own head a few dozen times before buying the 2.0L turbo. The issue for me comes down to power loss at altitude (which only impacts a few of us). My daily drive (in Colorado) is between 6500ft - 7100ft. Weekend drives can be from 6500ft - 1400ft. At 3% power loss for every 1000ft in altitude, the V6 just loses to the 2.0L turbo in every way. The turbo pulls harder than I expected and the added fuel economy (not that I really care) is "gravy". My wife has the V6 on her 2018 Cherokee and I only like driving it in "Sport" mode. Otherwise, it's a dog. At altitude, I think either would be fine...especially if its going to spend most of it's time in ATL traffic. But, I would rethink the 22s...lol J/K

 

[VolCntry73]

When I ordered my Rubicon back in June of last year, there were not 2.0's on the lot to test drive, and there was not definitive answer on when they would start shipping. That said, if I was ordering today, I would stick with the V6. Not only does it have proven reliability, while I'm sure the 2.0 performs well, I still have a hang up with having a 48v battery underneath an offroad vehicle. I'm sure it will be fine...but just can't get away from the concern.

 

[Gron86]

CJ pony parts did a test with a 4 door V6 JL vs a 2 door JL turbo.
The V6 pulled a whole lot better than the turbo, despite its weight disadvantage.

With that being said, test drive both and make a decision.

Sure there might be some tuning available for the turbo, but you can kiss your warranty good bye.

Oh and E-torq might give you issues down the line.

 

[tombovo]

The 2.0 is only available with auto transmission. That eliminated the 2.0 for me.

I like Pepsi more than Coke...9mm is better than .40...

Sorry, but I have to go with a Coke and .45 as the right way to go.

 

[MOPAR Boy]

My expectation is the diesel will definitely cost a ton of $'s, but I will pay whatever the hell FCA asks (ur, uh, make that "demands!"). The biggest drawback with the diesel is it will not be available, according to the FCA Exec at the 2018 Auto Show, until sometime in "CY2020." I take this to realistically mean the last day of CY2020, or in other words, hopefully by sometime 1Q2021. So, if you are willing to wait another 2 years (as am I), there's no doubt about it, the diesel is the way to go. Ppl buying in June 2019 and settling for the boring V6, or the tiny turbo 4-binger/electric boost, will be absolutely sick to their stomachs when they see and hear that beautiful sound of a kickass diesel mall crawler Jeep Gladiator (or Wrangler). Even worse, they will take horrendous hits on their trade-ins, and this after only 2 years (or less) of ownership. Best to wait for the awesome oil burner, peeps! But hey, IMHO, JM2C, and YMMV!

 

[rubicon20032003]

I had a 3.6 in my 18.So I ordered a 2.0 in my 19 to try.The 3.6 was old to me.Had it in my jk too

 

[wmgeiger]

I went through this discussion in my own head a few dozen times before buying the 2.0L turbo. The issue for me comes down to power loss at altitude (which only impacts a few of us). My daily drive (in Colorado) is between 6500ft - 7100ft. Weekend drives can be from 6500ft - 1400ft. At 3% power loss for every 1000ft in altitude, the V6 just loses to the 2.0L turbo in every way. The turbo pulls harder than I expected and the added fuel economy (not that I really care) is "gravy". My wife has the V6 on her 2018 Cherokee and I only like driving it in "Sport" mode. Otherwise, it's a dog. At altitude, I think either would be fine...especially if its going to spend most of it's time in ATL traffic. But, I would rethink the 22s...lol J/K

I agree 100% on the turbo. I drove both 19 UJL equipped the same and hands down at 5-6k feet the engine is way stronger IMO. I'm a tech guy so give me the most you have. One big thing that everyone is forgetting as I understand it the V6 with have the 48 volt system later this year. I'm not worried about as it is here to stay!

 

[singaporeIrish1]

Now one month/900 miles in on a 2019 2.0L and 4 months/3,200 miles on a 2018 3.6L. Owned lots of Jeeps and multiple 3.6L's ... but have to say that I prefer the daily driving of the 2.0L. Like the responsiveness and punch. Live in central Illinois where we've recently

had back-to-back weekends of 13" and 5" of snow. Pulled a Cadillac CTS from a ditch using the 2.0L ... no issues, no difference to the 3.6. The only thing I would change would be the sound/tone of the 4 cylinder. Looking / listening to some muffler solutions to see if that provides any remedy. Happy with the 2.0 ... Its the one I choose to drive and I'm an old school Jeep guy.

 

[nerubi]

I like Pepsi more than Coke...9mm is better than .40...

9 mm bounce off perps. 45 or 40. Or 357 if old style.

 

[nerubi]

I test drove both for quite a while. I didn’t want to like the turbo but I did and wound up buying. More torque and power.

As others have said in other threads, only if you use 91 and pay at least $1000 or more.

 

[nerubi]

I'd be more concerned about your gearing especially if not a Rubicon. Those huge wheels and big tires put a lot of weight on your Jeep.

 

[PEABUDY]

My expectation is the diesel will definitely cost a ton of $'s, but I will pay whatever the hell FCA asks (ur, uh, make that "demands!"). The biggest drawback with the diesel is it will not be available, according to the FCA Exec at the 2018 Auto Show, until sometime in "CY2020." I take this to realistically mean the last day of CY2020, or in other words, hopefully by sometime 1Q2021. So, if you are willing to wait another 2 years (as am I), there's no doubt about it, the diesel is the way to go. Ppl buying in June 2019 and settling for the boring V6, or the tiny turbo 4-binger/electric boost, will be absolutely sick to their stomachs when they see and hear that beautiful sound of a kickass diesel mall crawler Jeep Gladiator (or Wrangler). Even worse, they will take horrendous hits on their trade-ins, and this after only 2 years (or less) of ownership. Best to wait for the awesome oil burner, peeps! But hey, IMHO, JM2C, and YMMV!

Guess you will just be stuck driving that G63

 

[viper88]

Now one month/900 miles in on a 2019 2.0L and 4 months/3,200 miles on a 2018 3.6L. Owned lots of Jeeps and multiple 3.6L's ... but have to say that I prefer the daily driving of the 2.0L. Like the responsiveness and punch. Live in central Illinois where we've recently

had back-to-back weekends of 13" and 5" of snow. Pulled a Cadillac CTS from a ditch using the 2.0L ... no issues, no difference to the 3.6. The only thing I would change would be the sound/tone of the 4 cylinder. Looking / listening to some muffler solutions to see if that provides any remedy. Happy with the 2.0 ... Its the one I choose to drive and I'm an old school Jeep guy.

I have to give your reply much more weight. Your feedback is not from a few back to back test drives at a dealer. You are unique because you actually own both and drive them back to back daily. Would love to hear more feed back from you. Thanks.

 

[Deleted member 29342]

I went with the 3.6. It’s been around for years. I learned my lesson on getting a turbo truck that isn’t diesel. I had a f150 with the eco boosted motor. Three years in 32,000 miles later turbos had to be replaced.

Sponsored