2018 Wrangler 3.6 Pentastar Dyno

[techieanalyst]

Think everyone had hoped to see different things, me I have a great DD spare and a nice off road toy the engine itself sounds the same, feels the same, I find the big fix has been the transmission. I can hit the 60mph speed no issues, she zooms right there on the highway, merging onto four lanes I felt I was “trying to fit in” and now it’s “get a head of the pack”. Doesn’t have anything on my new 2018 F150 with the updated 5.0 in sport mode but she doesn’t feel like he’s trying hard now.

Sponsored

 

[Rockmaninoff]

Everyone in this thread is now dumber for having read what you just wrote.

Profound things have that effect on certain people :D

 

[The Great Grape Ape]

I’m not expecting a Hellcat engine just closer to 400/400 would be nice.

However, getting there with a tinyturbo4 isn’t the best way for a Wrangler.

As for yours and Rock’s assumptions, re-read prior posts, many of us aren’t against a 400/400 Wrangler, but favour a more reliable 5.7L Hemi to adhieve it, not trying to tune a 2.0L turbo to 368HP+ as previously discussed. The benefits need to balance with the other aspects, and when we mention that 0-60 isn’t the focus, it’s because it isn’t not because we don’t want improved performance.

And no the hybrid system doesn’t give you an additional 90 torque on top of the existing engine torque. They work sequentially. It’s a good thing for sure. But it’s not what you’re thinking. It’ll be used to start the engine from a stop and get you rolling to like 3mph so the gas engine can kick in and take it from there.

Yes, it is additive, not sequential, but not how you or most people think. As discussed before, due to electric engine torque delivery they aren’t adding maxes.... well unless the Prodigy dyno results were extended to 0 as they imply, then it would be 90+260lbft, but only near takeoff/idle.

This is why Low RPM characteristics matter, and a torque curve starting at 2,500 RPM isp pretty much useless.

 

[The Great Grape Ape]

PS, should be test driving a Rubi on Friday morning after hockey (they only had a White Sahara this morning, should be two Nacho Saharas and a Black Rubi inTransit according to the system), so will see how well it holds gear in the ZF8 then.
Couldn’t test acceleration in 4th from rolling idle to redline yesterday, as traffic didn’t allow for it, but will try again with the NAG1 in a few hours when I go to pickup the GF from work at the hospital when the roads are a little emptier.

So will advise of findings once I have something to report.
Should be fun testing in freshly fallen snow.

 

[DanW]

PS, should be test driving a Rubi on Friday morning after hockey (they only had a White Sahara this morning, should be two Nacho Saharas and a Black Rubi inTransit according to the system), so will see how well it holds gear in the ZF8 then.
Couldn’t test acceleration in 4th from rolling idle to redline yesterday, as traffic didn’t allow for it, but will try again with the NAG1 in a few hours when I go to pickup the GF from work at the hospital when the roads are a little emptier.

So will advise of findings once I have something to report.
Should be fun testing in freshly fallen snow.

In the brief time I drove on snow, I found those KM2's to be exceptional!

 

[The Great Grape Ape]

OK, so after a bit of fun testing which I even did with the GF on the way back, as the return direction was truly empty on the highway so I could let it wind out a bit more. Despite her being tired from work the GF was actually curious about this once I explained what I was up to in my scheming little mind.

First of all, you cannot engage 4th from a standstill, just 1st & 2nd.

Even once moving you are limited to gear selection options for up-shifting, 3rd comes shortly, but 4th requires about 25+kph/15+mph to engage.

Once in 4th you can’t quickly take your foot off the throttle and slow down to idle or it will drop you back down gears, you must slowly reduce throttle input coasting along and you can get down to near idle, which in my case is currently set a bit higher for winter. I was able to drop below 1K every run, but two of the later runs (with higher top RPM) started around 850 and 750 respectively once I got the hang of it. I also think on a rolling road this would be easy and as I mentioned you could likely dial in even lower RPM.

Now when punching it, if you literally floor it it will want to kickdown, however you can get full acceleration with 3/4+ throttle and it will climb very constantly through the RPMs without shifting. Remember you’re not trying to beat a clock on a rolling dyno, you’re just trying to get linear or constant RPM increase to show power, and so there really isn’t any need to stomp on it anyways.

I wasn’t able to reach redline in 4th because I was running out of safe feelings once I got around 5K RPM and 120KPH / 75MPH on cold -13C road with a light dusting of snow on them in 2WD while accelerating, and had already crested the speed limit a few 100 RPM earlier. I might have pushed it a few hundred RPM higher had I not had a co-pilot who likes to remind me of my speeding ticket count vs her. Although this time I think she was just as interested as I was, I’d even say giddy, to see how Mello’ Yello’ fared in tests run.

Despite not maxing out, based on prior experiences with forgetting I had down-shifted for hill-descent engine braking in 3rd or starting in 2nd from a wintery intersection and then near redlining it in the past, I have no doubt it would’ve pushed on to redline in 4th as well.. or at least until the speed limiter kicked in.

Now this was run with the 2015 NAG1 with 3.73 axles and stock tyres (just for reference), but I have little doubt that the ZF8 can also be set to 6th to get 1:1 and do the same on a rolling road.

However, even if you would need a lower gear, they can calibrate for that as well, just like how they offset for environmental and altitude parameters, although admittedly that loses precision... although not as much as a flat curve starting at 2,500 RPM in my op-onion.

Well, it was a fun test for the both of us, and kind provides a bit more insight into the old soon to be departed Auto, and hopefully the ZF can provide a little similar inisght on Friday.

So, I think had Prodigy made the effort they coulda gotten lower RPMs from the JLU, however what the limits of their test equipment are is another question, though I would think that could be toggled in deeper setting somewhere too.

Anywhoo, always fun to test a theory.

Now just need someone with a dyno to test a 2.0T with the BSG enabled and disabled, to get an idea of the contribution of eTorque and compared the decay as well as the usual typical torque curve.

 

[Dynomite1371]

I don't think the 3.6 is going anywhere any time soon. They are only in their 2nd year after a major rework. Also, the zero to 60 time is not good compared to what? A ZR-2? Motor Trend got 7 seconds from the ZR2 V6, and the Jeep gets better mileage, and that 's with a Rubicon.

It does even better with acceleration vs. a Tacoma TRD Pro.

Look around and I think you'll see that the JL is not only competitive, but has a slight advantage over other mid sized off-road oriented trucks. My Rubicon feels quicker, handles better, and brakes better than the ZR2, and it gets better mileage. On top of all that, it will trounce those vehicles off-road. And, I can take my top and doors off, and drop the windshield. The back seat has more room than the Taco and ZR2, as well. I didn't even mention the Uconnect and Alpine systems, which are superior.

Jeep JLU FTW.

I really don't care about the numbers, what I will tell everyone.... This engine, with this 8 speed auto is great. It's quick, it accelerates quick, it shifts smooth, it's not always looking for a gear, it's more quiet, and from any speed when you punch it, it goes! It's clearly better than previous model. I'm really not sure why anyone would wait for a first year Turbo if this motor was a dog, than maybe, but it's not!

 

[Rockmaninoff]

Now when punching it, if you literally floor it it will want to kickdown, however you can get full acceleration with 3/4+ throttle and it will climb very constantly through the RPMs without shifting.

Nice findings and it's a means to an end but aren't the claimed improvements at W.O.T.?

Also I forgot to mention that there's some trick beyond turning TC off you need to do to get a 5spd JK to dyno on 2H on a 2wd dyno (i.e. rear only) because motionless front wheels put the vehicle to a limp mode pretty quickly. Using 4H on a AWD solves the problem but there's a noticeable increase in drivetrain losses in 4H vs. 2H. Haven't tried long pressing the TC either but might try that.

 

[WXman]

202 lbs/ft is atrocious considering that it's 2018. Again, we were seeing numbers like that from V6 engines when I was just a boy decades ago.

 

[techieanalyst]

I really don't care about the numbers, what I will tell everyone.... This engine, with this 8 speed auto is great. It's quick, it accelerates quick, it shifts smooth, it's not always looking for a gear, it's more quiet, and from any speed when you punch it, it goes! It's clearly better than previous model. I'm really not sure why anyone would wait for a first year Turbo if this motor was a dog, than maybe, but it's not!

Couldn't have said it better myself, vs the JK there is no comparison really, fast, shifts feel instant etc

 

[The Great Grape Ape]

202 lbs/ft is atrocious considering that it's 2018. Again, we were seeing numbers like that from V6 engines when I was just a boy decades ago.

200lbft is at the wheels, not the crankshaft, so NO it’s not the numbers you’d see from a v6 from decades ago it’s much better than most of them, especially since Ford, Chevy and Toyota were running many V6s with barely more than that at the crank less than a decade ago with larger displacements.

 

[WXman]

200lbft is at the wheels, not the crankshaft, so NO it’s not the numbers you’d see from a v6 from decades ago it’s much better than most of them, especially since Ford, Chevy and Toyota were running many V6s with barely more than that at the crank less than a decade ago with larger displacements.

I understand that it's at the wheels. And it's atrocious. Decades ago we were seeing 180 to 210 at the wheels, hence my point.

 

[Rockmaninoff]

Decades ago we were seeing 180 to 210 at the wheels, hence my point.

There's a massive drivetrain loss that seems to be improved in the JL but you can only do so much with such heavy wheels, tires and beefy shafts. Which exact vehicles were you referring to?

My main gripe with the Pentastar is the integrated exhaust headers. The stock engine can handle close to 500hp with forced induction but imagine what would be possible if we could get the heat out quickly with better headers!

 

[offcamber]

I’m not expecting a Hellcat engine just closer to 400/400 would be nice. Enough to have a power reserve where you never have to floor it and never even consider if you have enough power to do whatever you want including passing someone going 65 on the freeway quickly. I’m a powerf hungry nerd. :D

And no the hybrid system doesn’t give you an additional 90 torque on top of the existing engine torque. They work sequentially. It’s a good thing for sure. But it’s not what you’re thinking. It’ll be used to start the engine from a stop and get you rolling to like 3mph so the gas engine can kick in and take it from there.

400/400? I remember my 89 mustang was fast as hell and it had 220hp/300ft/lb of torque..

I get what you are saying with the hybrid system, but it DOES actually add torque due to the way it's hooked into the driveline.

 

[Bearded_Dragon]

400/400? I remember my 89 mustang was fast as hell and it had 220hp/300ft/lb of torque..

I get what you are saying with the hybrid system, but it DOES actually add torque due to the way it's hooked into the driveline.

That was 30 years ago when sports cars ran 15 second 1/4 miles, that's pathetically slow today. Here we have a Wrangler weighing twice as much that Mustang with only 65 more HP and -35tq, the Wrangler needs better engines.

Sponsored