2019 Jeep Wrangler Ordering Shows 3.0L CRD Diesel V6 (w/Manual Transmission?) and 3.6L BSG Engines!

[Poynter32]

Back to the OP’s topic of interest, looking at the number designations again, it seems clear that the 22B/S/G/R codes do not relate to a manual 3.0 because the Sport S JLU is not getting a 3.0 with 8spd nor are the JL 2dr models. It defies reason to suggest these models will get a 3.0 manual only without the 8spd option. I’d buy the argument that the 3.0/manual combo is all that fits in the 2dr models except that the JLU Sport S isn’t getting the 3.0/8spd so it would make no sense for it to get only the 3.0/manual like the supposed 2dr 22 codes. I’d love a manual 3.0 more than anyone, but it’s not happening unless FCA has made some truly bizarre drivetrain choices here.

You sir, are a dream killer! Hahaha!! Just kiddin. Lots of us would love a manual diesel. Let’s be thankful we even get an auto diesel...finally.

I agree without both of you. This is the only reason I already ordered my Jeep because I wanted a manual. I have wanted a diesel manual combo since I heard Jeep was getting a diesel 3 years ago but as it got closer everything I read said a 3.0 with a manual transmission isn’t even possible because there isn’t a transmission that can handle the torque. Not to say I didn’t get excited when I read it may be possible until @JLURD shattered my dreams once again. Haha.

Sponsored

 

[ToolMonkey]

Do you really want BSG though?

If your planning on either lifting or putting larger tires on, or especially both, Hell yes it make a difference.

 

[flyfish]

I agree without both of you. This is the only reason I already ordered my Jeep because I wanted a manual. I have wanted a diesel manual combo since I heard Jeep was getting a diesel 3 years ago but as it got closer everything I read said a 3.0 with a manual transmission isn’t even possible because there isn’t a transmission that can handle the torque. Not to say I didn’t get excited when I read it may be possible until @JLURD shattered my dreams once again. Haha.

A RAM 2500 CTD can be purchased with a 6sp G56 manual. It is capable of holding 800lbs of torque. I've had this transmission in my CTD since I purchased in 2005, it's a great manual. Too bad they won't put the engineering effort in to make this an option. I would a least be a tire kicker for the diesel, without a manual, I'm not interested.

 

[misanthrope]

Slant 6 is/was an epic motor. I doubt we'll see an actual return of a modern version, the articles I saw discussed extending the Hurricane motor by 2 cylinders. Still, I drool over the possibility of a modern Slant 6. Such a simple, basic, reliable workhorse.

=) That would be cool. My first car was a 225 cid slant-6 Plymouth. It was a great engine.

Agreed. I had a Volare wagon with a slant 6, and beat that car down. Never quit, and changing the starter was like changing the oil.

 

[Hazaa]

Could 22 be the hybrid?

I think it is possible it could be although it would be almost a full year early.

Lets looks at the options and the rumors.

Right now we know that order code "22" has been used before for a diesel engine(3.0) and for a hemi(5.7). With that we have 3 options technically already, the 3.0 CRD/ECO diesel, the 2.2 diesel from Europe (note order 22 and 2.2), and we have the highly unlikely 5.7 Hemi V8. All of these engines would likely have to be paired with the 8spd auto like with order 26 in the JLU.

Now lets add the still unknown plug in hybrid engine, which again would be coming out almost a full year early unless it is released Q4 next year. This makes 4 engines, now we can add the straight 6 is you would like, but this engine has only just been talked about and last i heard it was set for a 2020+ release. Note: the straight 6 FCA is working is not the same motor going to in the Maserati and Alfa, that one is being worked on by Ferrari, but the FCA is set to be 3.0 or less. Lastly we should through the 2.4 tiger in just because it is engine used fairly widely by Jeep right now.

So lets count it up, we have 6 "possible" engines that can be used for order code 22.
Now lets start talking realistically, the 5.7 can just go. Not only is the 5.7 the complete opposite direction in the fuel economy that Jeep is heading, but they would never offer that engine in a base model Wrangler.
Second to go is the straight 6, way to early in terms of industry talk, as well as every story talks about a 2020+ release for the engine. Sorry guys I want my slant 6 back too.
While I would like to see the plug in hybrid as early as 2019, to my knowledge they dont even know how they are going to put it in the Wrangler and the plant has not started working on it since they were just awarded(internally) the contract to build it. So unless FCA is going to drop a bombshell on how fast they can make these drivetrains i would say it is a long shot.
Next up is probably the most desired engine for a Jeep since the hemi came back. The 3.0 CRD/ECO diesel, this is great engine, and I am hoping it is the one code 22 refers too. BUT it CAN NOT be mated with the 6spd as it stands they would have to redesign it for the torque, and they would not have two 3.0 8spd code orders with the JLU. UNLESS this version of the 3.0 is an e-torque option with the 8spd, it may seem a weird combo it, but withe the e-torque option it would raise the city mileage up 26ish city/30ish hwy, and be probably the best bet for those who want 35+ tires. As it will help the vehicle be less sluggish off the line. This is if the are able to properly reinforce the 2dr for the heavy 3.0 weight and torque twist.

Alright finals here we go, runner up is the 2.4 tiger. While this maybe looked at as a no way, step back and think. This engine is so widely used in FCA and Jeep models right now, why wouldnt they try it out? It would be cheaper than the 3.6, so it would bring the base price point back down to what a JK roughly started at. It is a simple engine that would help make the jeep lighter for better fuel economy and can be paired with the 8spd or 6spd. Also I sure FCA has thousands of these engines that need to be used up now, think back to the old "world engines". They also could slap an e-torque option to this engine just to bump stats, they seem to be doing it everywhere else.

So this last entry makes the most since just from the engine to order code correlation. The 2.2 diesel they are using in Europe, hence the code 22 and 2.2 engine. This make since even in the face of the JLU getting the 3.0. The JLU is a bigger vehicle and can better reinforced to handle the heavier engine and torque. Another reason again being FCA probably has quite a few of these 2.2's available since the use it in Europe. It makes since to double up on the engine whenever possible to keep manufacturing costs down, ex: 2.4, 2.0, 3.6. This means that the cost reduction can be passed along to the consumer and give you a cheap entry level diesel that will likely be around the same price as the 3.6 or the 2.0 without the need for the 4dr unless you want it. Granted the 2.2 does not put up the most impressive number compared to the 3.0, but the fact that you will have to go up to the JLU a $2k upgrade, then get the 3.0 and 8pd combo will likely be another $4-6k so you are looking to spend $6-8k more just to get a diesel and all you want is the 2dr Wrangler JL. This entry level cheaper option will give you that diesel taste without the burnt wallet smell.

So my vote is for a 2.4 tiger/BSG for the cheaper base price or the 2.2 diesel for a cheaper diesel but decent power especially in the 2dr.

 

[Aaronneedsajeep]

I think it is possible it could be although it would be almost a full year early.

Lets looks at the options and the rumors.

Right now we know that order code "22" has been used before for a diesel engine(3.0) and for a hemi(5.7). With that we have 3 options technically already, the 3.0 CRD/ECO diesel, the 2.2 diesel from Europe (note order 22 and 2.2), and we have the highly unlikely 5.7 Hemi V8. All of these engines would likely have to be paired with the 8spd auto like with order 26 in the JLU.

Now lets add the still unknown plug in hybrid engine, which again would be coming out almost a full year early unless it is released Q4 next year. This makes 4 engines, now we can add the straight 6 is you would like, but this engine has only just been talked about and last i heard it was set for a 2020+ release. Note: the straight 6 FCA is working is not the same motor going to in the Maserati and Alfa, that one is being worked on by Ferrari, but the FCA is set to be 3.0 or less. Lastly we should through the 2.4 tiger in just because it is engine used fairly widely by Jeep right now.

So lets count it up, we have 6 "possible" engines that can be used for order code 22.
Now lets start talking realistically, the 5.7 can just go. Not only is the 5.7 the complete opposite direction in the fuel economy that Jeep is heading, but they would never offer that engine in a base model Wrangler.
Second to go is the straight 6, way to early in terms of industry talk, as well as every story talks about a 2020+ release for the engine. Sorry guys I want my slant 6 back too.
While I would like to see the plug in hybrid as early as 2019, to my knowledge they dont even know how they are going to put it in the Wrangler and the plant has not started working on it since they were just awarded(internally) the contract to build it. So unless FCA is going to drop a bombshell on how fast they can make these drivetrains i would say it is a long shot.
Next up is probably the most desired engine for a Jeep since the hemi came back. The 3.0 CRD/ECO diesel, this is great engine, and I am hoping it is the one code 22 refers too. BUT it CAN NOT be mated with the 6spd as it stands they would have to redesign it for the torque, and they would not have two 3.0 8spd code orders with the JLU. UNLESS this version of the 3.0 is an e-torque option with the 8spd, it may seem a weird combo it, but withe the e-torque option it would raise the city mileage up 26ish city/30ish hwy, and be probably the best bet for those who want 35+ tires. As it will help the vehicle be less sluggish off the line. This is if the are able to properly reinforce the 2dr for the heavy 3.0 weight and torque twist.

Alright finals here we go, runner up is the 2.4 tiger. While this maybe looked at as a no way, step back and think. This engine is so widely used in FCA and Jeep models right now, why wouldnt they try it out? It would be cheaper than the 3.6, so it would bring the base price point back down to what a JK roughly started at. It is a simple engine that would help make the jeep lighter for better fuel economy and can be paired with the 8spd or 6spd. Also I sure FCA has thousands of these engines that need to be used up now, think back to the old "world engines". They also could slap an e-torque option to this engine just to bump stats, they seem to be doing it everywhere else.

So this last entry makes the most since just from the engine to order code correlation. The 2.2 diesel they are using in Europe, hence the code 22 and 2.2 engine. This make since even in the face of the JLU getting the 3.0. The JLU is a bigger vehicle and can better reinforced to handle the heavier engine and torque. Another reason again being FCA probably has quite a few of these 2.2's available since the use it in Europe. It makes since to double up on the engine whenever possible to keep manufacturing costs down, ex: 2.4, 2.0, 3.6. This means that the cost reduction can be passed along to the consumer and give you a cheap entry level diesel that will likely be around the same price as the 3.6 or the 2.0 without the need for the 4dr unless you want it. Granted the 2.2 does not put up the most impressive number compared to the 3.0, but the fact that you will have to go up to the JLU a $2k upgrade, then get the 3.0 and 8pd combo will likely be another $4-6k so you are looking to spend $6-8k more just to get a diesel and all you want is the 2dr Wrangler JL. This entry level cheaper option will give you that diesel taste without the burnt wallet smell.

So my vote is for a 2.4 tiger/BSG for the cheaper base price or the 2.2 diesel for a cheaper diesel but decent power especially in the 2dr.

I like your logic! I would be fine with a 2.2l diesel. Maybe they can pait it with a manual because it has lower torque. Also if you check the tow capacity it actually has a higher tow rating than the 3.0 not sure why.

 

[Mjmi69]

Do you all think the 3.6L BSG will match the 2.0 Turbo in mpg? If mpg is similar, I am less inclined to spend the extra $1k on the 2.0 for minimal performance benefits and potential reliability concerns.

Can anyone explain the difference with the current engine and the new BSG, sorry I don’t know what the change is or what it will do to be better or worse. Thanks

 

[misanthrope]

Can anyone explain the difference with the current engine and the new BSG, sorry I don’t know what the change is or what it will do to be better or worse. Thanks

Check the forum for deets. The short version is that the BSG is a mild hybrid system with a 48 volt second battery that controls the stop/start function and initial launch. It both replaces standard ess and its battery and the standard alternator while adding about 75 lbs of torque at launch and improving mpge. But, at what cost?

 

[Jljohnny]

just saying … still waiting for my 2018 turbo from February to be delivered...
(if your thinking of diesel, may want to order now)

Crazy, I ordered in June and took delivery first week of August

 

[WXman]

A RAM 2500 CTD can be purchased with a 6sp G56 manual. It is capable of holding 800lbs of torque. I've had this transmission in my CTD since I purchased in 2005, it's a great manual. Too bad they won't put the engineering effort in to make this an option. I would a least be a tire kicker for the diesel, without a manual, I'm not interested.

The G56 is HUGE and very heavy. No way they would put that in a JL. They already had to tweak the Wrangler and stretch it out a little to fit the 850RFE. It's also expensive and would drive the price up, and we all know the pricing on JL is stupid.

There just isn't a feasible manual transmission they can use behind the EcoDiesel in the Wrangler, and that's one reason we'll never see one. Emissions certification is the other reason.

Check the forum for deets. The short version is that the BSG is a mild hybrid system with a 48 volt second battery that controls the stop/start function and initial launch. It both replaces standard ess and its battery and the standard alternator while adding about 75 lbs of torque at launch and improving mpge. But, at what cost?

BSG is not a hybrid. The gasoline engine is the main power 100% of the time.

I agree, it's likely to be very expensive and less reliable over the course of 5-10 years. Currently, I think a replacement BSG unit is running around $1,500 not including labor. No thanks, I'll keep my simple 3.6L.

 

[misanthrope]

BSG is not a hybrid. The gasoline engine is the main power 100% of the time.

I agree, it's likely to be very expensive and less reliable over the course of 5-10 years. Currently, I think a replacement BSG unit is running around $1,500 not including labor. No thanks, I'll keep my simple 3.6L.

You're 100% wrong. The BSG is classified by all but you as a mild hybrid system, and will actually launch the vehicle prior to engaging the internal combustion cycle, and then use regenerative methods to recharge:
"This type of mild hybrid system provides several advantages. The auto stop start can now be done at speed while the truck is coasting down to a stop and the truck can relaunch on electricity, restarting the engine once it starts moving." https://www.forbes.com/sites/samabu...-mild-hybrid-on-all-gas-engines/#6fadf82a7e9e

 

[The_Phew]

WALL OF WORDS

So my vote is for a 2.4 tiger/BSG for the cheaper base price or the 2.2 diesel for a cheaper diesel but decent power especially in the 2dr.

The most logical explanation is that 22 is 3.6 BSG+6MT. I don't know why people keep coming up with these off-the-wall engine/transmission configurations when they most likely plan to just offer eTorque with both transmissions.

Mild hybrid powertrains have been coupled with manual transmissions for two decades (Honda, Buick, BMW, etc), although the JL would be the first 6MT application of a 48V system (in the U.S.; I think Audi has some 48V+6MT vehicles in Europe).

 

[Schipperke]

Based upon what we're seeing today, the current 3.6L is matching the 2.0L in MPGs, when you compare apples to apples (same trim levels, options, tires, etc.). So, I would think that the BSG 3.6L would do better in the real world than the 2.0L.

Also, my wife has a 2018 Cherokee with the 4-cyl and her mileage is exactly the same as mine when I run my stock tires.

I'd favor the 3.6L on 87 octane usage alone. I read the 2.0L specifies 91 octane, so factor that cost in to MPG as well.

 

[Hazaa]

The most logical explanation is that 22 is 3.6 BSG+6MT. I don't know why people keep coming up with these off-the-wall engine/transmission configurations when they most likely plan to just offer eTorque with both transmissions.

Mild hybrid powertrains have been coupled with manual transmissions for two decades (Honda, Buick, BMW, etc), although the JL would be the first 6MT application of a 48V system (in the U.S.; I think Audi has some 48V+6MT vehicles in Europe).

While I did not think about that as an option, I am not sure still. Why didnt they do the 2.0 BSG with the 6spd then? That would have been a very fun sporty Wrangler. It seems they only want to pair manuals with base non tech driven engines. But at some point I think these BSG/Mild hybrid systems may become the standard to ensure a baseline mpg.

 

[The_Phew]

While I did not think about that as an option, I am not sure still. Why didnt they do the 2.0 BSG with the 6spd then? That would have been a very fun sporty Wrangler. It seems they only want to pair manuals with base non tech driven engines. But at some point I think these BSG/Mild hybrid systems may become the standard to ensure a baseline mpg.

The 2.0 isn't a major product offering in the U.S.; they only sell it here because they already engineered it for Europe, and they figured why not bump up their CAFE ratings a bit by selling some in the U.S. The V6 was always intended to be the volume seller here. The 2.0's desire for 91 Octane means it has no economic advantage in the U.S. (unlike Europe, which has higher octanes and gas prices), so it's purely a novelty for folks that just prefer forced induction.

I do agree that they'll eventually make BSG standard, again for CAFE reasons. And I doubt they'll drop the 6MT, because they have a core of diehard customers that demand it in their Wrangler. So there you go, 22 is most likely 3.6+BSG+6MT.

Sponsored