2.0 turbo vs Pentastar V6

[AnnDee4444]

FWIW: Higher octane gasoline burns slower. If there is no pinging, and ignition/fueling remain the same, the higher octane could actually result in a slight power decrease.

Sponsored

 

[DanW]

I am in the corn-belt also and mostly Ethanol blends in the Chicago area. The lower energy is definitely noticeable, especially with some winter blends. I don't notice power dropping off but I notice lower mpg with some Ethanol blends. I found a station that had Ethanol free gas years ago and tried it. My mpg went up about 10%.

I always wanted to test some of the gas for Ethanol content. A friend had a clear glass tube, like a test tube with measurements on it to test Ethanol content. I think he mixed water with gas and the Ethanol would separate so you could see the percentage.

There is an older thread around here somewhere where I shared the test with photos. It is really kind of fun and interesting to do. I may do it again sometime soon and post results for more kinds of fuel.

 

[DonBindas]

It's not a jeep? Then what is it? Some kind of of weird spacecraft. Crap like this is what makes people sound retarded.

Sorry to offend you, but this is why I said it:

"it felt like a cross between a motorcycle and a sports car with the doors and roof off of it"​

 

[Rdmitch]

I’m probably dead wrong, but faced with this decision as well I prefered the 3.6 over the turbo.
Agree, the turbo had a bit more zip but I went with the tried and true proven Pentstar over a Italian built engine designed for Alpha Romeo modified to work in a jeep. Granted some are built in Mexico and the car sticker will indicate engine build location. Seemed like too many extra service parts with inter cooler stuff.

Just my opinion, so don’t jump all over my case.

 

[JLCITY]

If you're buying new it's a long powertrain warranty, and the federal emissions warranty grabs most of the etorque system and sends it out to 7 or 8 years!

 

[AnnDee4444]

There it is again: "tried & true"

To me it seem like the 3.6 has some sort of nostalgic effect on some people. I've read the "tried & true" idiom more times on this forum than the rest of my entire life combined. I can't figure it out either... The 3.6 isn't old enough for nostalgia.

What does a motor have to accomplish for this coveted saying to apply? How and why does it's origin factor into this ranking system?

 

[Digiwolf]

Sorry to offend you, but this is why I said it:

"it felt like a cross between a motorcycle and a sports car with the doors and roof off of it"​

Not offended at all, it was just a stupid statement, just like the new one you made now. How does it feel like a motorcycle? Have you ever ridden on a motorcycle? Also how does it feel like a sports car? It's the exact same body on frame vehicle. Everything you're saying makes no sense and is completely stupid.

 

[DanW]

There it is again: "tried & true"

To me it seem like the 3.6 has some sort of nostalgic effect on some people. I've read the "tried & true" idiom more times on this forum than the rest of my entire life combined. I can't figure it out either... The 3.6 isn't old enough for nostalgia.

What does a motor have to accomplish for this coveted saying to apply? How and why does it's origin factor into this ranking system?

Actually the 3.6 Pentastar, in various subversions, have been on Ward's (a reputable automotive engineering trade publication) 10 best engines in the world list at least 3 and maybe 4 times. Few engines have done that. It has been in Wranglers since 2012, but not only that, it has been in cars, pickups, and mini-vans for longer than that. It has been produced in the millions and is known within the industry to have a high reliability rate and long life expectancy, with many to be found with over 300,000 miles on them.

You can decide what "tried and true" means to you. I doubt Webster's has a specific time table. I'd say in this case, a decade, millions of units, and a rep for long life makes it tried and true, in my opinion.

The 2.0 in the Wrangler hit the market in 2018, and didn't reach significant numbers until the 2019 model year. The Alpha version wasn't much older, and certainly didn't have huge volume. As I've said before, it is off to a very good start. But find me a Jeep with one over 50k miles. I'm sure there are a few out there, but they are all highway miles, which are easy. I want to see one with 150k that lived a Jeep's life, not that of a highway traveler or commuter. That day is coming, but it isn't here yet. I've personally seen a number of very high mileage Pentastars in Jeeps, including several at 300k plus. They are common. I've also not personally seen a Jeep owner that has done the recommended maintenance and has worn one out. Heck, I haven't even seen an abused one that has worn out.

One can argue that the 2.0 is on its way to a great reputation, and I'd agree. But it would be harder to argue that the Pentastar is not proven. In fact, it would be silly to say otherwise. So I think "tried and true" is a badge the Pentastar has earned.

So I think someone choosing a 3.6 because it is a known quantity is doing just fine.

Here are my main reasons. 1, manual transmission, 2, proven track record, 3, good rep, 4, no direct injection, 5, no turbo, 6, 12v system, and 7, smooth and quiet. (The 4 sounds and feels like a 4, although acceleration is like an 8.)

I'd be perfectly happy with the 2.0, though, if the V6 were not available. Remember, my JK has the 3.8. That engine never had a great reputation for anything. I've loved every minute with that Jeep, nonetheless. 138k on that old minivan engine and it still runs like new. Only regular maintenance and still on the original water pump. Go figure.

 

[DonBindas]

Not offended at all, it was just a stupid statement, just like the new one you made now. How does it feel like a motorcycle? Have you ever ridden on a motorcycle? Also how does it feel like a sports car? It's the exact same body on frame vehicle. Everything you're saying makes no sense and is complete stupid.

I'm not looking to start an argument, but for background, I owned a sports car dealership for 35 years and I own 6 motorcycles.

So yes, the base Sport rental JLU with e-torque with no doors or roof on the rolling hills of north-central North Carolina was just like driving a cross between a motorcycle and a sports car.

My rough riding all terrain tread 33 inch BFG tired 16 MPG V/6 Rubicon with 4:10 gears feels like a Jeep and the smaller smooth tread tired rental didn't.

The rental was precise and fun.

If I needed a daily commuter, the 4 cylinder version would be my pick.

But I don't and with a Rubicon, I don't have to explain anything to anybody, as they gawk at it with passion in their eyes.

So, instead of being smart, I fed my ego.

I absolutely loved driving the 4 cylinder e-torque "City" Jeep, in fact, that experience was one of the top 5 driving experiences ever!

 

[Digiwolf]

 

[smithrd65]

Actually.. with the JL 0-60 (low 7s everyday) are much better with higher octane due to the 11:1 compression.. if I run lower grade fuel in my CJ6 with a old school 440 with 11:1 it bangs and knocks really bad..

On the JL there is noticeable performance difference.. smoother.. much more low end at >6k feet elevation.. I have ran 93 a few times and the computer adjust to that as well, resulting in better HP... impressive software package.. I have done multiple long range trips loaded with a trailer and full gear and intentionally ran 87 vs 91 the MPG drops 1-2 consistently, hill climbs on the grapevine = dropping another gear etc..

Don't under estimate good fuel..

Just my experience in my local on our Sierra mountains..

If you have convinced yourself there is an improvement, I will agree to disagree SIR

 

[smithrd65]

I would usually agree but it might depend on the transmission and tune. How different is the tune between a manual and automatic? I drove 3 different 3.6 with manual transmissions. Might be in my head but I swear 2 had some mild pinging or detonation under certain conditions or load? I wonder if higher octane would have helped? Or maybe it was just all in my head? I did not notice that with the 8=speed? Or maybe it was bad gas? Maybe someone who has a manual can chime in?

Did a search and there was this thread already for anyone interested.

https://www.jlwranglerforums.com/forum/threads/wrangler-rubicon-jlu-3-6-engine-pre-detonation.10322/

We are talking stock not race cars, my BMW Z4is requires 91 or better but again I am pushing 500hp to the wheels modified of course. But a 3.6 ok I agree

 

[DonBindas]

If you have convinced yourself there is an improvement, I will agree to disagree SIR

I agree with TCogs1

With electronic spark timing, octane will determine the spark advance.

Higher octane provides a more consistent flame front on higher compression engines

 

[TCogs1]

If you have convinced yourself there is an improvement, I will agree to disagree SIR

Whether we agree or not is irrelevant, the science in this space is settled facts...

In not "convincing" … it is data and facts.. and it does not matter if its 100 hp or 1000 hp..a Jeep or a weed whacker...

Fuel is a key variable to be managed if your trying to optimize performance.

"The Pentastar upgrade engine (PUG) has cooled exhaust gas recirculation to cut knocks and reduce pumping losses. A new intake manifold with longer runners boosted torque, and various changes allowed an increase in compression ratio from 10.2:1 to 11.3:1. Heads include high-tumble intake ports and shrouded combustion chambers. "

Source: https://www.allpar.com/mopar/V6/PUG-2015.php

Your not going run 11.3 (or a turbo) without a management system to deal with fuel octane, altitude and number of other variables.

Besides.. I was just sharing my experience, dissing me was not helpful to the conversation nor appreciated... SIR.

 

[AnnDee4444]

Actually the 3.6 Pentastar, in various subversions, have been on Ward's (a reputable automotive engineering trade publication) 10 best engines in the world list at least 3 and maybe 4 times. Few engines have done that. It has been in Wranglers since 2012, but not only that, it has been in cars, pickups, and mini-vans for longer than that. It has been produced in the millions and is known within the industry to have a high reliability rate and long life expectancy, with many to be found with over 300,000 miles on them.

You can decide what "tried and true" means to you. I doubt Webster's has a specific time table. I'd say in this case, a decade, millions of units, and a rep for long life makes it tried and true, in my opinion.

The 2.0 in the Wrangler hit the market in 2018, and didn't reach significant numbers until the 2019 model year. The Alpha version wasn't much older, and certainly didn't have huge volume. As I've said before, it is off to a very good start. But find me a Jeep with one over 50k miles. I'm sure there are a few out there, but they are all highway miles, which are easy. I want to see one with 150k that lived a Jeep's life, not that of a highway traveler or commuter. That day is coming, but it isn't here yet. I've personally seen a number of very high mileage Pentastars in Jeeps, including several at 300k plus. They are common. I've also not personally seen a Jeep owner that has done the recommended maintenance and has worn one out. Heck, I haven't even seen an abused one that has worn out.

One can argue that the 2.0 is on its way to a great reputation, and I'd agree. But it would be harder to argue that the Pentastar is not proven. In fact, it would be silly to say otherwise. So I think "tried and true" is a badge the Pentastar has earned.

So I think someone choosing a 3.6 because it is a known quantity is doing just fine.

Here are my main reasons. 1, manual transmission, 2, proven track record, 3, good rep, 4, no direct injection, 5, no turbo, 6, 12v system, and 7, smooth and quiet. (The 4 sounds and feels like a 4, although acceleration is like an 8.)

I'd be perfectly happy with the 2.0, though, if the V6 were not available. Remember, my JK has the 3.8. That engine never had a great reputation for anything. I've loved every minute with that Jeep, nonetheless. 138k on that old minivan engine and it still runs like new. Only regular maintenance and still on the original water pump. Go figure.

My intent was not to put down the 3.6 in any way. I have no doubts that it is a great engine, and have driven many myself. That was a rant about the "tried & true" saying rather than the engine itself, because to me the saying doesn't have much value. Other pointless sayings I have seen on this forum are: "stops on a dime" and "handles like it's on rails"... in a Jeep. I get what the point is, but the default answer of "tried & true" has lost most of it's meaning to me.

I guess we should consider the 2.0 "untested & false" /s

Sponsored