2.0L 4cyl engine reliability issues?

[jmccorm]

How about the wimpy noise at low speeds? Lol. Just got my 2.0 and good lord I gotta get used to the electric weed eater sound

At this late date, I'm actually surprised to see "reliability issues" being questioned here.

With all the fear, uncertainty, and doubt that originally surrounded the 2.0T when it was a brand new engine, in the time since, it has turned out to have proven itself quite admirably. If we're in a thread about reliability issues, and we're talking about engine noise under acceleration, things must be pretty damn good with this engine.

PS: I'm more than pleased that Jeep DID NOT integrate the MultiAir option. Im also glad that when it came time to tune the turbo, they set their target much closer to reliability than performance. Everything says to me that they were looking to build a reliable powerplant. They succeeded, didn't they?

Sponsored

 

[Windshieldfarmer]

I agree the noise when the engine is cold is terrible sounding. That said this thing is a beast at high altitude and it outperforms in drivability at all speeds. I n we ver lack for power on the highway or when wheeling.

 

[west tex]

How about the wimpy noise at low speeds? Lol. Just got my 2.0 and good lord I gotta get used to the electric weed eater sound

Weedeater, you say.

Mine sounds like a sewing machine before it's warmed up.

 

[micahpop]

How about the wimpy noise at low speeds? Lol. Just got my 2.0 and good lord I gotta get used to the electric weed eater sound

If you don't mind a little extra noise at start up and would welcome better ground clearance, this aFe hi tuck exhaust is a nice option to improve the overall sound of our beloved weed eater.

https://afepower.com/afe-power-49-4...-409-stainless-steel-axle-back-exhaust-system

Dang, it was about $380 when I bought mine a year and a half ago...

 

[Rubigone]

Engines under 2 liters have tax advantages in many countries. Building engines in 0.5 liter increments helps parts sharing.

Not really the only reason, if you take a look at most modern engines you will find that they all hover around 0.5 litre cylinders ranging from small 3 cylinder 1.5 litre engines to big 4 litre v8s, 5 litre v10s and 6 litre v12s. There is actually research done by a university (don’t remember the name but google is your friend) that proved this theory.

 

[AnnDee4444]

Not really the only reason, if you take a look at most modern engines you will find that they all hover around 0.5 litre cylinders ranging from small 3 cylinder 1.5 litre engines to big 4 litre v8s, 5 litre v10s and 6 litre v12s. There is actually research done by a university (don’t remember the name but google is your friend) that proved this theory.

I'm not sure how accurate the university study claim is.

Car & Driver says:

"A decade or so ago, a team of German university scientists settled on 500 cubic centimeters as the ideal per-cylinder displacement for internal-combustion engines. A 500-cc cylinder with a stroke length larger than its bore diameter, these forgotten pioneers concluded .​

Odd that they are forgotten. Car & driver also confirms:

"500-cc-displacement intervals align nicely with existing global taxation statutes."​

Autoweek references Car & Driver, but goes on to list other theories:

"There is a popular notion that German university engineers first settled on the 500cc cylinder being the ideal in the early 2000s... Another belief is that Ford had the idea early on. "​

Cosworth's thoughts:




I was not able to find this university study anywhere. It's possible it doesn't exist online. Also somewhat related, Mazda's 2.5 is a scaled up version of their 2.0, rather than just increased bore and/or stroke with the same block & head. I've read that this was done for efficiency.

 

[Herson]

27,675 miles without problem until today. Coolant leak. Waiting the tow truck to take it to the dealership. Hopefully this is a quick fix.

 

[Hennessey17]

I would love to see a true apples to apples 0 to 60 race between these two engines. I've seen a number of attempts but it's always differently set up vehicles. When I bought mine they had two 2 doors and I drove both multiple times. While I couldn't really rag them out, I got a decent feel for both. 2.0 was louder, small car sounding, with momentary surges but it did it did not seem faster just jerky. The 3.6 was linear and smooth and sounded better in its efforts. My experience/opinion and you can see, they vary wildly. This doesn't speak to reliability, but since it was introduced a few years ago I haven't seen anything that would speak negatively to its overall reliability.

I actively searched for negative articles on the 2.0 for a couple of years and couldn't find anything.

My previous vehicle, a VW with the 2.0 was very easy to find negative info...

Between that and the resale value of all Wranglers, I thought there was minimal risk picking the 2.0.

 

[Grooster]

Spending a day driving my wife's 2.4L Cherokee made me appreciate the 2.0 etorque in my Jeep ten fold. The Cherokee's 2.4 is a slug in comparison (180 hp). The next day I had to remind myself to watch my speed as I had my foot in it - because it was so much fun! I'm at 45K on the Jeep and continue to enjoy trouble free driving.

 

[WXman]

1/4 of the plugs. The HEMI has 2 plugs per cylinder.

Ahhhhhh Grasshopper, that would be true if the replacement intervals were the same AND folks actually replace the buried ones…..LOL

I miss the days when you could change your plugs without dumping half your engine out into your driveway.

I did plugs on my 5.7 Hemi in my Challenger a month or two ago. The price of the plugs hurt because 16 plugs adds up, but as far as actually changing them out it was a piece of cake. The coil packs and plugs are all in easy to see locations and the job was extremely straight-forward.

Is the 2.0T hard to do? Why do people talk about it so much? I've never done one and I'm seriously curious.

I agree the noise when the engine is cold is terrible sounding. That said this thing is a beast at high altitude and it outperforms in drivability at all speeds. I n we ver lack for power on the highway or when wheeling.

I've had 4 of the Pentastar engines in 4 different vehicles. And I got to spend a full week with a JLU 2.0t. I will admit that the 2.0 feels stronger and returned MUCH better fuel economy. The engine sound didn't bother me, but the jerky starts and non-linear throttle did. Day to day driving is frustrating with it, but that engine sure is strong and thrifty.

 

[Grooster]

I just noticed that Jeep is now selling Cherokees with the 2.0 Turbo. That should make Cherokee sales soar! The wife's 2016 has been long paid for and she's of no mind to trade. But if that ever changed... ?

 

[jjvincent]

I did plugs on my 5.7 Hemi in my Challenger a month or two ago. The price of the plugs hurt because 16 plugs adds up, but as far as actually changing them out it was a piece of cake. The coil packs and plugs are all in easy to see locations and the job was extremely straight-forward.

Get a Dodge truck with a Hemi. The ones over by the brake booster are a joy to get out. Plus when the coil packs get old, they can break off the tip and then you need to dig it out just to get a socket on the plugs. Fun times.....

 

[JeeperKeeper]

Nothing is bulletproof. The 3.6 is good, not perfect. The 2.0's launch has been better than either generation of the 3.6.

The 2.0 with etouque can have battery issues the non etourque is better

 

[Grooster]

The 2.0 with etouque can have battery issues the non etourque is better

Haven’t seen them. I’m at 45,000 miles in all weather & at altitude as well as sea level. It just works. Like all things, proper maintenance is key to success.

 

[Strommen95]

The 2.0 with etouque can have battery issues the non etourque is better

ETorque or not isn’t relevant to this thread. 2.0s these days have the Auxiliary anyways..

Sponsored