2.0L Turbo Engine Ordering NOW Open, $1000 MSRP Upcharge

$uicide$hift

Well-Known Member
First Name
Jeff
Joined
Feb 21, 2018
Messages
1,593
Reaction score
2,603
Location
Masshole
Vehicle(s)
2018 Jeep Wrangler Unlimited Sahara
I really don't care about this debate. Personally I plan to trade in my V6 JL when a new special edition is released that I like. At that time I will evaluate all motors available.

With that being said I could not resist! :cwl::cwl::cwl:

driving-a-4-cylinder-jeep-on-theinterstate-your-thoughts-devil82-10224679.png





Advertisement

 

Matthew/E36

Well-Known Member
First Name
Classified
Joined
Dec 21, 2017
Messages
2,100
Reaction score
7,024
Location
StL
Vehicle(s)
Two Thousand and Eighteen Jeep Wrangler Unlimited
Personnaly I had a hard time to swallow that stupid « fanboy » comment. I personnaly couldn’t care less about who chooses what, as I long as I can freely choose !
But don’t come shit in my yard or I’ll wipe your ass with a pitchfork ! Lol
Well the 6-tine forks get better coverage, but personally I go with the old school 4 tine. The 4 tine will always get more poke per dollar. When they came out everyone stopped buying 3 tine all together.
 

JLU_rubi18!

Well-Known Member
First Name
Jay
Joined
Jan 3, 2018
Messages
190
Reaction score
182
Location
Seminole, Fl
Vehicle(s)
2015 Jeep SRT Red Vapor, 2015 Jeep GC High Altitude Hemi 4x4
I had the 3.6 in my last Jeep. Decent engine but far behind the competition.

Chevy 3.6L V6
  • 335 hp @ 6800 rpm
  • 284 lb-ft of torque @ 5300 rpm
 

BillyHW

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2017
Messages
1,885
Reaction score
1,718
Location
CAN
Vehicle(s)
-
I had the 3.6 in my last Jeep. Decent engine but far behind the competition.

Chevy 3.6L V6
  • 335 hp @ 6800 rpm
  • 284 lb-ft of torque @ 5300 rpm
Who wants direct injection and all the problems that come with it?
 

56nomad56

Well-Known Member
First Name
Steve
Joined
Dec 31, 2017
Messages
131
Reaction score
167
Location
Orange County CA
Vehicle(s)
'19 JLUS Ocean Blue, '15 BMW X1, '14 BMW 435i Coupe 6MT, '11 Pathfinder 4X4, '17 Chevy Volt, '56 Chevy Nomad, '14 BMW G650GS Sertao (yes I have a problem)
Yeah, good luck saving money when you’ll have to fill up with premium while the V6 needs only to be fed with 87... Between the premium and the $3,000 premium you have to pay to get the 2.0 (considering you can’t get a manual with it), please send us an update as soon as you’ve ACTUALLY saved money lol

I’m not saying the 2.0 engine is bad, nor am I gonna diss anyone going for it, really.
But the MPG argument is the worst, most unvalid one !
I've noticed from posters in other states that there can be a big difference in price between low, mid, and high grade gas. In that case you are definitely correct, it would be hard to justify the extra expense. Here in So Cal I use 89 for "regular" (87 is low), and 91 is premium. The difference between 89 and 91 is $0.10/gallon. So in a 15-gallon fill up it is literally $1.50 more for premium. Even the jump from 87-91 is only $0.20/gallon.

Let's say you average 15 miles per gallon with the V6 in mixed driving (there are a lot of hills and lights around here) and 20 with the turbo. To go 300 miles in the V6 you would need 20 gallons of gas @ $3.50/gallon, for a total of $70. To go the same 300 miles with the 2.0T you would need 15 gallons @ $3.60, or $54. That's about $800/year, keep it 10 years and you've paid off the $1,000 difference (I'm looking at the automatic) and saved up $7,000 for the down on your next Wrangler.

If they can get the 2.0 BSG into the 22-23 MPG range the difference will be even more pronounced.

So...I don't think the MPG argument is invalid, at least in certain cases. Not only that, but reducing our dependence on fossil fuels while putting less pollution into the air, getting more power, torque at lower RPMs, and easier power gains with computer flashes seems like a win win win to me.
 

Chicago

Well-Known Member
First Name
Rich
Joined
Jan 30, 2018
Messages
2,422
Reaction score
2,399
Location
Chicago
Vehicle(s)
Wrangler Rubicon JLU black on black loaded with turbo engine
Occupation
Pipefitter
Me and millions of others. DI isn't the boogieman you make it out to be.
I've noticed from posters in other states that there can be a big difference in price between low, mid, and high grade gas. In that case you are definitely correct, it would be hard to justify the extra expense. Here in So Cal I use 89 for "regular" (87 is low), and 91 is premium. The difference between 89 and 91 is $0.10/gallon. So in a 15-gallon fill up it is literally $1.50 more for premium. Even the jump from 87-91 is only $0.20/gallon.

Let's say you average 15 miles per gallon with the V6 in mixed driving (there are a lot of hills and lights around here) and 20 with the turbo. To go 300 miles in the V6 you would need 20 gallons of gas @ $3.50/gallon, for a total of $70. To go the same 300 miles with the 2.0T you would need 15 gallons @ $3.60, or $54. That's about $800/year, keep it 10 years and you've paid off the $1,000 difference (I'm looking at the automatic) and saved up $7,000 for the down on your next Wrangler.

If they can get the 2.0 BSG into the 22-23 MPG range the difference will be even more pronounced.

So...I don't think the MPG argument is invalid, at least in certain cases. Not only that, but reducing our dependence on fossil fuels while putting less pollution into the air, getting more power, torque at lower RPMs, and easier power gains with computer flashes seems like a win win win to me.
im willing to bet most people ordering the Turbo are doing so for sure he increase in power and acceleration not the gas mileage
 

BillyHW

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2017
Messages
1,885
Reaction score
1,718
Location
CAN
Vehicle(s)
-
I've noticed from posters in other states that there can be a big difference in price between low, mid, and high grade gas. In that case you are definitely correct, it would be hard to justify the extra expense. Here in So Cal I use 89 for "regular" (87 is low), and 91 is premium. The difference between 89 and 91 is $0.10/gallon. So in a 15-gallon fill up it is literally $1.50 more for premium. Even the jump from 87-91 is only $0.20/gallon.

Let's say you average 15 miles per gallon with the V6 in mixed driving (there are a lot of hills and lights around here) and 20 with the turbo. To go 300 miles in the V6 you would need 20 gallons of gas @ $3.50/gallon, for a total of $70. To go the same 300 miles with the 2.0T you would need 15 gallons @ $3.60, or $54. That's about $800/year, keep it 10 years and you've paid off the $1,000 difference (I'm looking at the automatic) and saved up $7,000 for the down on your next Wrangler.

If they can get the 2.0 BSG into the 22-23 MPG range the difference will be even more pronounced.

So...I don't think the MPG argument is invalid, at least in certain cases. Not only that, but reducing our dependence on fossil fuels while putting less pollution into the air, getting more power, torque at lower RPMs, and easier power gains with computer flashes seems like a win win win to me.
I think direct injection engines produce way more noxious and particulate emissions than port injection engines, and considering that CO2 is plant food, and increased concentrations of it lead to higher crop yields and a reversal of desertification, I'd call that a lose-lose.

http://articles.sae.org/13624/
 

That One Guy

Well-Known Member
First Name
Ryan
Joined
Feb 8, 2018
Messages
1,178
Reaction score
1,400
Location
Utah
Vehicle(s)
2004 Honda Accord coupe, V6 6-speed manual; ordered 2018 JL Sport 6MT with A/C and anti-spin. D status.
Me and millions of others. DI isn't the boogieman you make it out to be.
It also isn't problem free across all manufacturers, not yet. Non DI proven V6 is actually one of the biggest JL selling points to me. I value trusted and simple over cutting edge when I'm 30 miles from a paved road, and I'm fine with the economy cost of that.

A bunch of Wrangler owners just dig having the simple old stuff, ya feel?. There's a league of Wrangler aficionados that are gonna keep the last straight six TJ's running until they rust out, for example.
 

That One Guy

Well-Known Member
First Name
Ryan
Joined
Feb 8, 2018
Messages
1,178
Reaction score
1,400
Location
Utah
Vehicle(s)
2004 Honda Accord coupe, V6 6-speed manual; ordered 2018 JL Sport 6MT with A/C and anti-spin. D status.
im willing to bet most people ordering the Turbo are doing so for sure he increase in power and acceleration not the gas mileage
This. What's the 4 rated at, one whole mpg more? The low mid end power advantage is where that motor appears to shine. I won't buy it until I know it's proven, but who knows. If it's offered with a manual in coming years I could go that route.
 

BillyHW

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2017
Messages
1,885
Reaction score
1,718
Location
CAN
Vehicle(s)
-
So what is the real reason the 2.0 is not being offered in a manual?
 

Chicago

Well-Known Member
First Name
Rich
Joined
Jan 30, 2018
Messages
2,422
Reaction score
2,399
Location
Chicago
Vehicle(s)
Wrangler Rubicon JLU black on black loaded with turbo engine
Occupation
Pipefitter
I think direct injection engines produce way more noxious and particulate emissions than port injection engines, and considering that CO2 is plant food, and increased concentrations of it lead to higher crop yields and a reversal of desertification, I'd call that a lose-lose.

http://articles.sae.org/13624/
This jeep talk or EPA forum , I’m going with the turbo for increased acceleration and Torque Win Win lol
 

BillyHW

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2017
Messages
1,885
Reaction score
1,718
Location
CAN
Vehicle(s)
-
This jeep talk or EPA forum , I’m going with the turbo for increased acceleration and Torque Win Win lol
I wasn't the one who brought it up.

If we're talking performance, I'm concerned the 2.0 will fade away at higher revs whereas the V6 gives pretty much linear power delivery all the way up to redline.
 

That One Guy

Well-Known Member
First Name
Ryan
Joined
Feb 8, 2018
Messages
1,178
Reaction score
1,400
Location
Utah
Vehicle(s)
2004 Honda Accord coupe, V6 6-speed manual; ordered 2018 JL Sport 6MT with A/C and anti-spin. D status.
So what is the real reason the 2.0 is not being offered in a manual?
manual is what, 10% of new Wranglers? They figure anyone stubborn enough to want one won't be picky about which engine. It's really not an area where the market is forcing them to do more at all. We're a dying breed, us manual people!
 

Advertisement




PSC Motorsports
 



Advertisement
Top