Etorque article

[xray]

https://www.greencarreports.com/new...-etorque-does-some-smart-things-with-48v-tech

This solidifies my thoughts that this is pretty complicated relative to the merit. It’s understandable they are trying to increase their fleet averages, but in the consumer end you’d really want the PHEV rather than this mild hybrid with potentially a very short shelf life both as a product, and as the end user of the tech’s out of warranty cost.

Sponsored

 

[HendersonJL]

Screw this!! My JL has ESS!!!

I am saving the world.......... one engine shut down at a time!

 

[TJ2018]

This solidifies my thoughts that this is pretty complicated relative to the merit. It’s understandable they are trying to increase their fleet averages, but in the consumer end you’d really want the PHEV rather than this mild hybrid with potentially a very short shelf life both as a product, and as the end user of the tech’s out of warranty cost.

Not sure how the article supports your view, I didn't see anything but kudos for the eTorque system. The mild hybrid comes with an 8-year/80,000 mi warranty... not what I'd consider a short shelf life. Personally I LOVE the 2.0T with eTorque and would do it again in a heartbeat.

 

[ViperJon]

Not sure how the article supports your view, I didn't see anything but kudos for the eTorque system. The mild hybrid comes with an 8-year/80,000 mi warranty... not what I'd consider a short shelf life. Personally I LOVE the 2.0T with eTorque and would do it again in a heartbeat.

I agree. How did the OP derive that negative take away from that article?

 

[FDXGUY]

I know the 2019 Rams with a 5.7 and etorque are having nothing but problems. I was researching them on the Ram forums before I bought mine and the owners were seeing no real world benefits and having issues. That why I decided to stick with the regular 5.7 and I also didn’t want to be a guinea pig for the 2.0 in my JL.

 

[ViperJon]

And here we go again for the umpteenth time.......

 

[TJ2018]

That why I decided to stick with the regular 5.7 and I also didn’t want to be a guinea pig for the 2.0 in my JL.

Definitely your prerogative, but I have yet to see any pattern of problems with the 2.0T in the Wrangler. Best I can tell those of us who have the 2.0T really like the 2.0T and have no regrets. Most of the hate for the 2.0 comes from 3.6 folk.

 

[jayvis]

Definitely your prerogative, but I have yet to see any pattern of problems with the 2.0T in the Wrangler. Best I can tell those of us who have the 2.0T really like the 2.0T and have no regrets. Most of the hate for the 2.0 comes from 3.6 folk.

Exactly. They're just trying to justify their choice to themselves. This shouldn't be a competition folks.

 

[FDXGUY]

Definitely your prerogative, but I have yet to see any pattern of problems with the 2.0T in the Wrangler. Best I can tell those of us who have the 2.0T really like the 2.0T and have no regrets. Most of the hate for the 2.0 comes from 3.6 folk.

I don’t hate the 2.0. I think it’s great that the consumer has options. I have friends that have a 2.0 and love them. It just was nothing I was interested in.

 

[The_Phew]

Everything about a 48V mild hybrid system actually REDUCES wear/tear on electrical/drivetrain components:
-More voltage=less current, current=heat, heat=wear. I guarantee these mild hybrid setups will extract much more longevity out of their 12V alternators (a common failure point on modern autos)
-The 48V starter-generator produces gobs more torque than the regular 12V starter, relieving stress on the engine and 12V starter
-Prolonging motor mount life (another common failure point) by "actively damping vibration when shutting the engine off by delivering torque to counter the rotation in pulses"
-Prolonging transmission life by "actually getting some regeneration from each of those upshifts—a negligible amount, but it saves the transmission clutches that normally do the task"
-Prolonging brake life with regenerative braking (ask any hybrid owner how much they spent on their last brake job; they can't answer you, because they probably never had to replace brake pads/rotors). A water-cooled lithium battery is a much easier place to 'dump' energy than trying to dissipate it from air-cooled brake pads/rotors.
-Better cooling "using the bonus current to overrun the cooling fans and pre-emptively cool the radiator". All mechanical components last longer when they are kept cool.

So sure, you might have to replace a ~$500 lithium battery every decade (although maybe not; the batteries in the OG Tesla Roadsters are still going strong), but on paper you should save thousands by extending the life of your motor mounts, brakes, engine, transmission, starter, and alternator.

ALL THAT SAID, this is FCA we are talking about, who are still struggling with long-ago-solved issues like frame welds and how to design a steering system for a solid front axle vehicle. So it's very possible that their implementation of 'eTorque' will be a disaster.

 

[digitalbliss]

I agree. How did the OP derive that negative take away from that article?

EASY, you go in with your mind made up about what you believe, skim the article for a few key words/phrases that triggers your predecided decision, skip all the stuff in between that doesn't support your position, post the link to the article and proclaim your thoughts and how justified you are in having them.

 

[xray]

I agree. How did the OP derive that negative take away from that article?

From the complexity of the system. It went into a lot of the algorithmic detail of when the system kicks in, and it also couples with ESS to eek out that final extra efficiency.

I want a system that’s more plugin Prius-like with a 4 cylinder that does more generation and the electric motors do the propulsion.

 

[ViperJon]

From the complexity of the system. It went into a lot of the algorithmic detail of when the system kicks in, and it also couples with ESS to eek out that final extra efficiency.

I want a system that’s more plugin Prius-like with a 4 cylinder that does more generation and the electric motors do the propulsion.

It would once again seem like people who are generally negative about the turbo system base their opinion not on what has happened (nothing major with tens of thousands in service) but what they think "will" happen "someday". Which is odd because owners of Jeeps especially older platforms are usually very accepting of change and innovation. /sarcasm

 

[xray]

It would once again seem like people who are generally negative about the turbo system base their opinion not on what has happened (nothing major with tens of thousands in service) but what they think "will" happen "someday". Which is odd because owners of Jeeps especially older platforms are usually very accepting of change and innovation. /sarcasm

Nothing against turbo 4 like these other naysayers. It’s the after thought, mild hybrid part. Why even bother? Is it a perception issue, or cost issue? Full hybrids have been around for a decade now, but why this litte electric booster in the engine bay complicating things.

I say go big battery pack, and just go for the 30+mpg benchmark for a brick like the Wrangler.

 

[TimmH]

Exactly. They're just trying to justify their choice to themselves. This shouldn't be a competition folks.

Not I, I just wasn't sure of the technology yet, and not prepared to be one to test it. Made that mistake with a Durango in '99.

Glad it's been good so far, that's good for the future. But I'm also still happy with my 3.6 choice.

Sponsored