1st Time Buyer. 2.0 or 3.6? Leather color for summer

[Rubi]

Great find!

There is a reason the dealer lots are loaded with 2.0's. I know I wouldn't buy one. It will be interesting to see if they hold their value as well as the 3.6

I’m hoping they back up more of their 2.0 inventory on all dealer lot’s; wake up and realize this is not a good motor to be in a Jeep Wrangler. This way they can go forward with an updated non-turbo straight 6 option and forget about this ridiculous BSG 4 banger.

Sponsored

 

[zamboniman]

Premium gas makes the 2.0 a non starter in my book. At least Ford got that right with their ecoboost offerings being optimized on standard gas.

Too many downsides relative to the minor upsides makes it misplaced in their go to market strategy. If the engine is necessary for emissions and cafe goals as one would conclude since the lots are flooding with them, you could almost argue it should be the base engine and the premium upcharge should be tied to the 3.6. I.e. if they want to have ol trusty v6 then you will pay more for it.

 

[Rubi]

Premium gas makes the 2.0 a non starter in my book. At least Ford got that right with their ecoboost offerings being optimized on standard gas.

Too many downsides relative to the minor upsides makes it misplaced in their go to market strategy. If the engine is necessary for emissions and cafe goals as one would conclude since the lots are flooding with them, you could almost argue it should be the base engine and the premium upcharge should be tied to the 3.6. I.e. if they want to have ol trusty v6 then you will pay more for it.

Everybody that purchased the 3.6 should be happy they didn't make it the premium extra cost engine.

What CAFE differences are attributed to the 2.0 BSG anyway? The 3.6 could be made more powerful and with better emissions by adding DI. IMO I'm glad this, DI, still hasn't been done.

 

[ormandj]

Not going to step into the argument about 2.0 vs. 3.6 again, as it's not about reality but about hypothetical situations in every single last one of these threads, but I don't think using the numbers of "2.0s on the lots" is a good metric to base anything on. The three dealerships I've talked to while in my search have said they are selling like hotcakes (the 2.0), they are just receiving a lot from Jeep, and that's why their lots are full of 2.0 Jeeps.

I was attempting to test drive matching vehicles back to back w/ the 2.0 vs. 3.6 before making the decision to purchase, and it took going to a third dealership to do so - nobody had many 3.6s in stock - not due to sales, but due to allocations. For what it's worth, all three dealerships I interacted with mentioned most customers bought the 2.0 if they test drove both, but did mention there were some buyers who refused to test drive them as "they were not reliable" and only wanted a 3.6. To each their own, but I sure wish we'd wait to see what happens before throwing stones and living in the land of theory.

Anecdotal, but a bit more useful than the number of 2.0s on the lots. Maybe we'll see a sales breakdown at some point, that would be interesting data. Doesn't really matter at this point, the OP bought the Jeep they wanted, and it's awesome. The 3.6 is a fine engine, and it sounds like they are very happy with it!

 

[Janne]

I test drove both. I liked the peppiness of the 2.0, but wasn’t brave enough to take it home! I stayed in my comfort zone as I had the same 3.6 in my Durango. Plus, I didn’t want to use/pay for premium for the best results.

 

[Rubi]

Not going to step into the argument about 2.0 vs. 3.6 again, as it's not about reality but about hypothetical situations in every single last one of these threads, but I don't think using the numbers of "2.0s on the lots" is a good metric to base anything on. The three dealerships I've talked to while in my search have said they are selling like hotcakes (the 2.0), they are just receiving a lot from Jeep, and that's why their lots are full of 2.0 Jeeps.

I was attempting to test drive matching vehicles back to back w/ the 2.0 vs. 3.6 before making the decision to purchase, and it took going to a third dealership to do so - nobody had many 3.6s in stock - not due to sales, but due to allocations. For what it's worth, all three dealerships I interacted with mentioned most customers bought the 2.0 if they test drove both, but did mention there were some buyers who refused to test drive them as "they were not reliable" and only wanted a 3.6. To each their own, but I sure wish we'd wait to see what happens before throwing stones and living in the land of theory.

Anecdotal, but a bit more useful than the number of 2.0s on the lots. Maybe we'll see a sales breakdown at some point, that would be interesting data. Doesn't really matter at this point, the OP bought the Jeep they wanted, and it's awesome. The 3.6 is a fine engine, and it sounds like they are very happy with it!

IMO, it's a generational preference. The young, 20's to mid 40's, will be drawn to the 2.0; I call them the fast an furious crowd. They believe technology, BSG, turbocharging, Direct Injection; is a good thing. This age group thinks the higher tech something is, the better it will perform. They need the latest in technology; just look at the cell phone craze whenever a new iPhone comes out they have to go and buy it, trading in their old, one year old, outdated phone.

 

[Rubi]

I test drove both. I liked the peppiness of the 2.0, but wasn’t brave enough to take it home! I stayed in my comfort zone as I had the same 3.6 in my Durango. Plus, I didn’t want to use/pay for premium for the best results.

How many mile were on this test subjects you took out? The 3.6 takes at least 1500 miles to begin to break in and become non-sluggish. I also felt my 3.6 open up even more around 2500 miles.

 

[Janne]

How many mile were on this test subjects you took out? The 3.6 takes at least 1500 miles to begin to break in and become non-sluggish. I also felt my 3.6 open up even more around 2500 miles.

Less than 100 on each. I took out a 2.0 Sahara, then Rubicon. Then the 3.6 Rubicon. Of course, I had to try the new Ram 1500 with the 5.7 before the Jeeps, just to rule it out.

 

[Rubi]

Less than 100 on each. I took out a 2.0 Sahara, then Rubicon. Then the 3.6 Rubicon. Of course, I had to try the new Ram 1500 with the 5.7 before the Jeeps, just to rule it out.

It seems like many first time testers are not driving the optimum 3.6. My JLR manual was a slug for the first 500 miles. It would barely take any gas. I knew this was due to a very tight engine that had to be broken in.

 

[blnewt]

Nice result you ended up with! Congrats!

 

[ormandj]

It seems like many first time testers are not driving the optimum 3.6. My JLR manual was a slug for the first 500 miles. It would barely take any gas. I knew this was due to a very tight engine that had to be broken in.

Engines are essentially broken-in at the factory nowadays. There's a little wear in the first bit of driving, but the hone is already off the cylinder walls by the time you're 100 miles down the road. The ECU just tunes itself based on conditions from fuel to air density, and you get acclimated to the vehicle. The break-in period is more about the transmission/differentials/etc. Either way, if that were true of the 3.6, it'd be true of the 2.0 (or any other engine for that matter). One could argue people aren't testing 'the optimum 2.0' based on your assertion regarding the 3.6.

The only thing that is likely happening re: engine after the initial hundred miles or so is the tune/timing being adjusted to match the petrol you use, and the throttle (not sure if it's dynamic on Jeeps) and transmission (not a function with your 6-speed) adapting to driving habits. I've never seen any engine I've data logged require 500+ miles to adjust to conditions and run optimally. You can run a used oil analysis (I've done this on all of my built engines) on samples taken at intervals during break-in, and see when the wear slows down.

I'll duck out now, I've been a part of polluting OPs thread enough. Congrats again!

 

[Janne]

Engines are essentially broken-in at the factory nowadays. There's a little wear in the first bit of driving, but the hone is already off the cylinder walls by the time you're 100 miles down the road. The ECU just tunes itself based on conditions from fuel to air density, and you get acclimated to the vehicle. The break-in period is more about the transmission/differentials/etc. Either way, if that were true of the 3.6, it'd be true of the 2.0 (or any other engine for that matter). One could argue people aren't testing 'the optimum 2.0' based on your assertion regarding the 3.6.

The only thing that is likely happening re: engine after the initial hundred miles or so is the tune/timing being adjusted to match the petrol you use, and the throttle (not sure if it's dynamic on Jeeps) and transmission (not a function with your 6-speed) adapting to driving habits. I've never seen any engine I've data logged require 500+ miles to adjust to conditions and run optimally. You can run a used oil analysis (I've done this on all of my built engines) on samples taken at intervals during break-in, and see when the wear slows down.

I'll duck out now, I've been a part of polluting OPs thread enough. Congrats again!

You’ve all been extremely helpful! Thank you

 

[OldGuyNewJeep]

Engines are essentially broken-in at the factory nowadays. There's a little wear in the first bit of driving, but the hone is already off the cylinder walls by the time you're 100 miles down the road. The ECU just tunes itself based on conditions from fuel to air density, and you get acclimated to the vehicle. The break-in period is more about the transmission/differentials/etc. Either way, if that were true of the 3.6, it'd be true of the 2.0 (or any other engine for that matter). One could argue people aren't testing 'the optimum 2.0' based on your assertion regarding the 3.6.

The only thing that is likely happening re: engine after the initial hundred miles or so is the tune/timing being adjusted to match the petrol you use, and the throttle (not sure if it's dynamic on Jeeps) and transmission (not a function with your 6-speed) adapting to driving habits. I've never seen any engine I've data logged require 500+ miles to adjust to conditions and run optimally. You can run a used oil analysis (I've done this on all of my built engines) on samples taken at intervals during break-in, and see when the wear slows down.

I'll duck out now, I've been a part of polluting OPs thread enough. Congrats again!

This makes sense. I’m confused by the people saying their engine “woke up” after x number of miles. Mine has been the same since day one. It’s a great engine and transmission. (I have the 3.6 and manual transmission. Currently at 9,300 miles.) Maybe it’s just folks with the automatic who are noticing that shift points have adjusted to match their driving style?

 

[viper88]

Great find!

There is a reason the dealer lots are loaded with 2.0's. I know I wouldn't buy one. It will be interesting to see if they hold their value as well as the 3.6

I don't think all the 2.0s on dealer lots is a accurate indication of not selling? The 2.0 helps FCA meet their fleet CAFE averages. The more 2.0 sold the better the average. I think I read FCA's goal is something like 70% eTorque BGS for the Wrangler or something? The dealers I visited said FCA is allocating more 2.0Ts to them. They said they simply were not getting as many 3.6 from FCA unless someone orders them. There were also constraints on 3.6 last month if you wanted a 2-door Rubicon. I wonder if they are allocating the 3.6s to the Gladiator pick-up trucks now they are gearing up for production? The Gladiator is supposed to only get the 3.6 and Diesel, no 2.0.

 

[bumpit]

Congrats, I too chose ob. Great color!

Sponsored