2.0-liter four-cylinder engine

[mwilk012]

For me, 6 years in production is not new for an engine. There is no definition for how long an engine is considered new after it is introduced as new. I guess people can look at it how they want, but 6 years in production is not new to me at all.

To get technical one definition of new is " not existing before, made, introduced, or discovered recently or for the first time" So, the 2.0T doesn't fit in this definition.

Maybe we should re-term it, like "fairly new" or somewhat new to the Wrangler lineup" personally I could live with these def. But for me calling anything new that has been manufactured for 6 years is simple not new.

It depends on what your definition of “is” is.

Sponsored

 

[coyoteslocos]

As others have said, 2.0T is surprisingly full of life..def better than v6 imo.
My only complaint is that jeep doesnt offer the XR package on it. Why??!
I still ended up ordering the 2.0T

If you care for it, some journalistic opinions can be found here - https://www.motortrend.com/features/jeep-wrangler-jl-engine-differences/

How long of a wait for the new Jeep? I am contemplating ordering.

 

[Steve JLUR]

thats new for an engine my dude.

Wasn‘t the 2016 Pentastar 3.6l a redesign? If that is the case the argument about time tested goes out the window. I am not getting into the argument about which is better, I don’t care, I just want to point out that the Pentastar is no more time tested than the Hurricane engine.

 

[mwilk012]

Wasn‘t the 2016 Pentastar 3.6l a redesign? If that is the case the argument about time tested goes out the window. I am not getting into the argument about which is better, I don’t care, I just want to point out that the Pentastar is no more time tested than the Hurricane engine.

2016? do you mean 2018? It’s not a redesign any more than 2014 was. There were some small changes. Not significant design changes. If anything, the mating to different transmissions, ESS/BSG integration, and tuning are the differences.

 

[Steve JLUR]

2016? do you mean 2018? It’s not a redesign any more than 2014 was. There were some small changes. Not significant design changes. If anything, the mating to different transmissions, ESS/BSG integration, and tuning are the differences.

For 2016, FCA released an updated version of the 3.6 L engine for the Jeep Grand Cherokee and Dodge Durango. This engine now features two-stage variable valve lift (VVL), a cooled EGR, a new intake manifold, new fuel injectors, and new ignition coils. It also features upgrades to the variable valve timing (VVT) system, an increased compression ratio (11.3:1), lower internal friction and lower weight. These improvements help to increase power as well as efficiency.[8] The new version, however, has lost its flex-fuel capability.

that’s a redesign.

 

[mwilk012]

For 2016, FCA released an updated version of the 3.6 L engine for the Jeep Grand Cherokee and Dodge Durango. This engine now features two-stage variable valve lift (VVL), a cooled EGR, a new intake manifold, new fuel injectors, and new ignition coils. It also features upgrades to the variable valve timing (VVT) system, an increased compression ratio (11.3:1), lower internal friction and lower weight. These improvements help to increase power as well as efficiency.[8] The new version, however, has lost its flex-fuel capability.

that’s a redesign.

So, a few bolt on accessories is a redesign?

An “updated version” is not a new engine.

 

[jmccorm]

So, a few bolt on accessories is a redesign?

They called it a Gladiator.

 

[mwilk012]

They called it a Gladiator.

Horrible analogy. Gladiator to wrangler would be like casting a V-8 block with the same design characteristics as the pentastar. That’s a different thing.

 

[Steve JLUR]

So, a few bolt on accessories is a redesign?

“an increased compression ratio (11.3:1), lower internal friction and lower weight. These improvements help to increase power as well as efficiency”

I wonder what parts interchangeability there is between this version and the last? It is no more time tested than the Hurricane engine. The trope about time tested is incorrect. Again, I am not commenting on whether it is better, or not, than the Hurricane motor, just that the argument about time in service as an argument has no legs.

 

[mwilk012]

“an increased compression ratio (11.3:1), lower internal friction and lower weight. These improvements help to increase power as well as efficiency”

I wonder what parts interchangeability there is between this version and the last? It is no more time tested than the Hurricane engine. The trope about time tested is incorrect. Again, I am not commenting on whether it is better, or not, than the Hurricane motor, just that the argument about time in service as an argument has no legs.

literally billions of collective miles on the engine design. The 5.7 hemi has changed several times over its life as well. That does not mean Chrysler has4 different 5.7l engines.

 

[Steve JLUR]

literally billions of collective miles on the engine design. The 5.7 hemi has changed several times over its life as well. That does not mean Chrysler has4 different 5.7l engines.

You know for a fact that the changes between the two versions of the engine in reference are non-material? I have shown evidence of a material change in design, and your argument is, it didn’t matter… Now you are just arguing that your conjecture is right, and mine is wrong, because you said so.

I am not saying that the changes affected the lifespan of the Pentastar engine in any way, I don’t know, but neither do you. I am simply pointing out that it was changed, so the argument that it is the same goes away. The changes were not ”bolt on” they were internal.

Not saying you are wrong, just that you BELIEVING you are right does not make it so.

 

[jmccorm]

Horrible analogy. Gladiator to wrangler would be like casting a V-8 block with the same design characteristics as the pentastar. That’s a different thing.

Debatable? Actually, what you described (same core engine with some different bolt on accessories) was exactly the design goal of the Hurricane engine well before it made it's way to the 2.0L Wrangler. Not opinion, mind you, but explicitly stated as a major design goal.

After learning some earlier lessons, they got it right on the Wrangler. So if it isn't fair to call the 3.6L a redesign, then it certainly isn't true to call the 2.0L turbo engine a redesign either. (I don't think either one was.)

They both seem like Gladiators to me.

 

[jmccorm]

I honestly even prefer it quiet since I take conference calls in my car. Don’t have any plans of upgrading the exhaust for a louder exhaust note. Very happy with it.

This! I sure would like better engine sounds out of the 2.0L, but then I ask myself, do I really want to give up such a quiet ride?

 

[Zandcwhite]

So, a few bolt on accessories is a redesign?

An “updated version” is not a new engine.

Lighter weight likely means different block. Higher compression could be heads, pistons, or crank are different. Less friction means rings and/or bearings are different. New fuel injectors. New vvt means new cams. Literally every part of the engine was redesigned. Where do most engine failures occur anyway? Cams, valves, bearing, and ring, all of which are redesigned. Does that mean they will be less reliable than the previous gen? Of course not. They could prove more reliable. They could prove less reliable. The fact is the vast majority of New vehicle buyers don't keep their vehicles beyond 100k miles and any of the engine choices should easily go well beyond that point. For every 300k+ mile 3.6L out there you'll find dozens that failed long before that. If you're looking for that kind of super longevity, you are the exception and are likely kidding yourself that you'll keep the Jeep that long in my opinion.

 

[AnnDee4444]

In my opinion, the 3.6 PUG was a refinement to the 3.6. The 2.0 was a new motor.

It's unsure how long either will last, and likely depends more on the maintenance & driving style than anything. The difference in torque curves are very obvious and can be graphed. Which motor produces more peak power is debatable.

Sponsored