2.0 or 3.6? Canceling diesel build

[Zandcwhite]

The 4xe is great until you have no charge and then you have over 5k pounds with the 4 banger.

You do realize you literally never have no charge right? Every time you decelerate, you put charge back in to the system. The 4xe always has that extra 150ftlbs at 0rpms all the way to red line. Don‘t worry, the vast majority of people are just as misinformed about the function of a plug-in hybrid. The plugging in is 100% optional, they never need plugged in and pretty much always have enough charge to use the electric AND gas motors when you put your foot in it.

Sponsored

 

[Deleted member 59498]

You do realize you literally never have no charge right? Every time you decelerate, you put charge back in to the system. The 4xe always has that extra 150ftlbs at 0rpms all the way to red line. Don‘t worry, the vast majority of people are just as misinformed about the function of a plug-in hybrid. The plugging in is 100% optional, they never need plugged in and pretty much always have enough charge to use the electric AND gas motors when you put your foot in it.

Man those sound like so much fun. Just always have Saraha up here. Still look good but they add so much fluff to them 60K.

 

[Zandcwhite]

Now this is much better. Why couldn't we have this kind of discussion 5 pages ago?



2/10ths is about a fender at 60mph. Look at the rest of the numbers, the engines are almost neck and neck. Both dog slow in the 1/4. This has been my point all along. The difference in power is so small that ancillary things like MPG, NVH, complexity and weight actually become bigger factors in one's decision. That's why this debate rages on...there is no objective winner, it's all in preference.

At sea level, the overall difference is negligible. For every 1,000k of elevation the NA motor is loosing 3%, the turbo is loosing 1%. On the Dusy Erishim trail, the 3.6 is down 30%, the 2.0t is only down 10%. Go even higher like CO trails and the difference grows to over 30%. No, I don’t spend a lot of time over 13k feet, but we are in the 7k foot or higher range several times a month. That 15% difference would be huge even if the 2.0t didn’t already have an advantage at sea level. Accelerate up a steep mountain grade in each just once, it’s night and day in my experience.

 

[Zandcwhite]

Man those sound like so much fun. Just always have Saraha up here. Still look good but they add so much fluff to them 60K.

If you‘re in the market, don’t forget the $7,500 fed tax credit, possible state and local tax incentives, and HOV lane access depending on location. If our 2019 wasn’t already modded just the way we want, we’d be driving a 4xe.

 

[Herson]

You do realize you literally never have no charge right? Every time you decelerate, you put charge back in to the system. The 4xe always has that extra 150ftlbs at 0rpms all the way to red line. Don‘t worry, the vast majority of people are just as misinformed about the function of a plug-in hybrid. The plugging in is 100% optional, they never need plugged in and pretty much always have enough charge to use the electric AND gas motors when you put your foot in it.

Firs of all, off course you can run out of charge. TFL has done it in their tests. Second explain me how you have 150 at 0 RPMs? Lol

 

[Zandcwhite]

Firs of all, off course you can run out if charge. TFL has done it in their tests. Second explain me how you have 150 at 0 RPMs? Lol

Electric motors make the same torque at any rpm. Torque can be applied without rotational movement, see torque wrench for example... if you listened when tfl was reviewing it is out if charge to the point that it won't run in fully electric mode, there's still charge in the pack for HYBRID driving. I daily driver a cmaxx that I literally never plug in, but I'm sure your hybrid experience from a YouTube video that you clearly didn't understand is more relevant...

 

[Deleted member 59498]

If you‘re in the market, don’t forget the $7,500 fed tax credit, possible state and local tax incentives, and HOV lane access depending on location. If our 2019 wasn’t already modded just the way we want, we’d be driving a 4xe.

How often do you have to plug it in? Just curious I have to check if I have a plugin in the garage. Have a Condo community type garage. Have to check.

 

[Odyssey USA]

I was referring to 0-60, not the 1/4. As you can see in the referenced numbers, they have the same 1/4 mile ET.

Even a tenth at 60 can be almost a car length, not a fender. And earlier I said .2 and .1 respectively. ET being about 1-2 car lengths in favor of the 2.0 if they were the same weight but the 2.0 is 90 lbs heavier. There’s more than engines to consider. What fuel did C&D run? Point being, there’s a difference even in that example whether it’s small or not.

If you have two engines in the same vehicle, same peak horsepower (being the two are very very close in hp around the shift points at or near peak hp) the one with the most torque will win & reach the finish line first whether it be 60ft, or 1325ft. More cylinder pressure equals faster acceleration through that rpm.

Let’s test it in Denver.

 

[TX_Ovrlnd]

How often do you have to plug it in? Just curious I have to check if I have a plugin in the garage. Have a Condo community type garage. Have to check.

You don't have to plug it in at all, unless you want full benefit of the hybrid engine. Kind of the point in buying a 4xe, but not a mandatory requirement.

 

[Deleted member 59498]

You don't have to plug it in at all, unless you want full benefit of the hybrid engine. Kind of the point in buying a 4xe, but not a mandatory requirement.

yeah will look at some YT videos. Was not sure. 7500 tax break sounds good though if it actually works

 

[Deleted member 59498]

Damn that tax break is really great for my income level! Really is almost money in the pocket using IRS guidelines.

Put that back into the purchase then the 4xe with its huge Torque and HP it beats both 2.0 and 3.6, they both suck. And since 3.0T beats both of them like a curb stomp the 2.0 is not good at all and the 3.6 is not good at all. So they both suck equally!


All that said, I can't afford 392, can afford 3.0t that defeats 2.0 or 3.6.... The only other one for power and novelty is 4xe which at peak is better than 3.0t....

Oh and 10 year warranty on the hybrid system....

 

[Deleted member 59498]

The 4xe is great until you have no charge and then you have over 5k pounds with the 4 banger.

That kind of defeats your 4 banger love right? Same engine is it not or did they make a different one for the 4xe? The 2.0 is not good now? 300 pounds is a couple of my good old boys in the Jeep. Should not matter with that awesome best engine in the world 2.0t right? The best power for 35s and 37s which the 3.6 has no power at those levels of tires?

 

[Strommen95]

As to the DI 2.0, the valve train cover has a built in air/oil separator so maybe between that and the new rated oils, carbon buildup on the back of the intake valves will be mitigated.

The 2.0 is a bit more complex but look at where every vehicle is nowadays. It’s amusing to see people get so passionate about a topic like “reliability” with a well established technology (turbocharger) whilst the rest of the electronics in the vehicle seem to be more problematic than the mechanicals so far.

Jeep could do whatever they want with it to make people feel better. DI is still not a good thing and like ESS was done simply to save FCA money. I do agree that reliability really isn't a factor with either engine, especially relative to the rest of the vehicle. I could even argue DI is more cost affective due to fuel savings alone but can't say that in good faith with its track record in most vehicles.

And I like my 3.6 but the 2.0, I can put 35’s, winch, other weight on it and my heavy footed, non vehicle loving wife remarks that My Sahara is faster. (for anecdotal evidence It just mainly has the torque right where it’s more usable. The 8spd makes each of these engines even better though.

A properly geared 3.6 drives very well. Better than stock. I would be interested in directly comparing a regeared 3.6 on bigger tires and a 2.0 that's not regeared on bigger tires. It would be interesting to specifically highlight the torque difference that's obviously in the 2.0s favor. If the 2.0 truly doesn't need a regear, that's a major advantage.

Of course for $500 you can turn the boost up and have numbers that look like this…keep the v6 if you want to

No thanks, zero interest in ever boosting a vehicle. While cost would not be the same, supercharging a 3.6 would give better performance with zero turbo lag.

At sea level, the overall difference is negligible. For every 1,000k of elevation the NA motor is loosing 3%, the turbo is loosing 1%

Sure, nobodies arguing differently. You're still assuming that certain buyers care about power more than other variables. Most people in the United States don't live at elevation either.

Even a tenth at 60 can be almost a car length, not a fender. And earlier I said .2 and .1 respectively. ET being about 1-2 car lengths in favor of the 2.0 if they were the same weight but the 2.0 is 90 lbs heavier.

The comparison was two different JL Wranglers. It's not "can be a car length", it's approximately the size of a fender given two Wranglers were being compared in the 0-60.

If I was 600 lbs, I could kick Mike Tyons ass. The 2.0 is heavier, period. There's no "what ifs" if it was lighter. It's not.

What fuel did C&D run? Point being, there’s a difference even in that example whether it’s small or not.

According to 2.0 guys in this thread, the 2.0 was designed specifically for 87, so fuel really doesn't matter in this context. Can't have it both ways.

If you have two engines in the same vehicle, same peak horsepower (being the two are very very close in hp around the shift points at or near peak hp) the one with the most torque will win & reach the finish line first whether it be 60ft, or 1325ft.

Certainly. Which is why I'm genuinely laughing at another poster insisting Torque doesn't mean power under the context of comparing two different engines. Torque absolutely makes a difference.

 

[Herson]

That kind of defeats your 4 banger love right? Same engine is it not or did they make a different one for the 4xe? The 2.0 is not good now? 300 pounds is a couple of my good old boys in the Jeep. Should not matter with that awesome best engine in the world 2.0t right? The best power for 35s and 37s which the 3.6 has no power at those levels of tires?

Yes. Over certain weight, then it is logical the wrangler would need more power to carry all that weight. My point is that without a charge you have a 5,222 pound wrangler with 270hp/295tq vs a non 4xe rubicon with the same at 4,450 pounds. That is a big difference.

 

[Zandcwhite]

Yes. Over certain weight, then it is logical the wrangler would need more power to carry all that weight. My point is that without a charge you have a 5,222 pound wrangler with 270hp/295tq vs a non 4xe rubicon with the same at 4,450 pounds. That is a big difference.

You still don't understand that the vehicle will always have a charge? It doesn't fully discharge the battery pack, ever(that's really hard on a battery for one). If you've never driven a hybrid, go drive one. The acceleration is the same regardless of % of charge. Even when the gauge is showing no capacity. I read somewhere that the vehicle holds as much as 20% in reserve, to ensure that you always have the functionality of the electric motor if you step on it. Not only does the battery charge at even the slightest deceleration, any time the load is light enough it charges. The extra 150 ftlbs is always there.

Sponsored