2019 Order Help - Wait for 3.6l BSG? Worth it?

[viper88]

Thanks for posting that. Maybe it's just me but doesn't it strike you as odd that the FCA only charges $1000 for the BSG on a Wrangler ($1500 on a Ram truck) but replacement for the battery is as much or more than the whole BSG system new? That just doesn't make sense to me.

I'm not particularly excited by the BSG system coming. I would also be curious to know how much weight that system adds to the JL?

We don't know what they are charging for the 3.6 BSG because it's not available for the JL yet. There is a $1000 up charge for the 2.0 turbo motor with BSG over the current 3.6 though.

Sponsored

 

[Solidaxle]

Thanks for posting that. Maybe it's just me but doesn't it strike you as odd that the FCA only charges $1000 for the BSG on a Wrangler ($1500 on a Ram truck) but replacement for the battery is as much or more than the whole BSG system new? That just doesn't make sense to me.

I'm not particularly excited by the BSG system coming. I would also be curious to know how much weight that system adds to the JL?

Does not strike me odd at all , what strikes me odd is you haven’t noticed this on like a 1000 other items that you buy. It’s always cheaper to buy the total item new than in separate parts.
The diesel option on a truck is $6000 but the motor to buy it separately is $15,000. A new car cost $30,000 to buy , But that car could cost $100,0000 if you bought it through the parts department in pieces.

 

[Snowjeep]

We don't know what they are charging for the 3.6 BSG because it's not available for the JL yet. There is a $1000 up charge for the 2.0 turbo motor with BSG over the current 3.6 though.

I can't remember where I saw it but the projected price was around $1000 for the JL 3.6 and just under $1500 for the Ram trucks.

 

[Snowjeep]

Does not strike me odd at all , what strikes me odd is you haven’t noticed this on like a 1000 other items that you buy. It’s always cheaper to buy the total item new than in separate parts.
The diesel option on a truck is $6000 but the motor to buy it separately is $15,000. A new car cost $30,000 to buy , But that car could cost $100,0000 if you bought it through the parts department in pieces.

I get your point but if you're buying a $5,000 engine package and need to replace the crankshaft it won't cost the same price as the whole engine. Same thing goes for a replacement panel on the hart top, it's not going to cost more than the whole hard top when purchased with the vehicle.

 

[Kent5]

I get your point but if you're buying a $5,000 engine package and need to replace the crankshaft it won't cost the same price as the whole engine. Same thing goes for a replacement panel on the hart top, it's not going to cost more than the whole hard top when purchased with the vehicle.

Not surprising at all. Using your hard top as an example: buying just front L&R Freedom panels from the Parts dept at $545 (R) and $614 (L) -- over $1150 for both -- exceeds the $1100 option price for the entire hard top option at build time. FYI -- the rear section of the hard top (without the freedom panels) is over $1600 all by itself. That's over $2700 to buy the complete hard top at the parts counter vs. $1100 on the new vehicle option list.

Also, it could be that the $1000 2.0T option cost does not represent the actual cost increment over the V6, but rather Jeep sells each 2.0T option at a relative "loss" -- financially subsidizing the 2.0T option on new Wranglers, because it's higher MPG figures help their overall CAFE fuel economy average for the model. The more Wranglers that are equipped with the 2.0T, the better for Jeep's MPG averages -- that's a very big deal, both for corporate image and financially.

 

[Snowjeep]

Not surprising at all. Using your hard top as an example: buying just front L&R Freedom panels from the Parts dept at $545 (R) and $614 (L) -- over $1150 for both -- exceeds the $1100 option price for the entire hard top option at build time.

Also, it could be that the $1000 2.0T option cost does not represent the actual cost increment over the V6, but rather Jeep sells each 2.0T option at a relative "loss" -- financially subsidizing the 2.0T option on new Wranglers, because it's higher MPG figures help their overall CAFE fuel economy average for the model. The more Wranglers that are equipped with the 2.0T, the better for Jeep's MPG averages -- that's a very big deal, both for corporate image and financially.

Yes, it's more expensive to buy the aftermarket hard top as a whole or even individually than getting it at time of purchase but my point is when a part needs replacing, say the right panel, it won't cost as much as the whole option paid at purchase. If the BSG system, which is much more than the battery, only costs $1,000 - $1,500 it shouldn't cost that much to just replace the battery. That being said it sure doesn't mean that's not how much it will cost. My point is that it shouldn't cost that much and hopefully it doesn't in about 5 years when people need to start replacing them.

 

[Kent5]

Yes, it's more expensive to buy the aftermarket hard top as a whole or even individually than getting it at time of purchase but my point is when a part needs replacing, say the right panel, it won't cost as much as the whole option paid at purchase. If the BSG system, which is much more than the battery, only costs $1,000 - $1,500 it shouldn't cost that much to just replace the battery. That being said it sure doesn't mean that's not how much it will cost. My point is that it shouldn't cost that much and hopefully it doesn't in about 5 years when people need to start replacing them.

Specialized hybrid battery replacement has always been a huge cost that most people don't care about at new vehicle purchase point, as either they just don't think about it (its not in the brochure, and most people wouldn't understand the ramifications even if it was), or they think they'll have long since sold/traded the vehicle by the time the battery needs replacement.

All the specialized batteries I've seen for this type of application have been enormously expensive (think many thousands of $), but those were larger packs than the one in the 2.0T, so they may not be a good comparison. We're just now getting to the point where the hybrids are going to start aging out and battery replacements can be expected to be more common, so will economies of scale and multiple vendors come into play?

What is the expected lifetime of the 48V pack? 36,000 miles? 60,000 miles? 100,000 miles? No one knows. I'm guessing (?) it has the same 5/60 warranty as the rest of the powertrain, but the 48V battery may be excepted or have its own warranty, which could be shorter or longer than the standard, especially if the battery is considered a consumable/wear and tear item.

Overall, as long as the 48V battery has a decent life expectancy (say 100k miles), battery replacement cost is not a real concern to me, even at $1500. What stopped me was the added running costs and layers of added complexities of the 2.0T that made the few added MPG's not worth it. Some day in the near future, we'll have no choice but to accept those added complexities and costs, but as long as the 3.6L ESS is available, today is not that day.

 

[viper88]

Specialized hybrid battery replacement has always been a huge cost that most people don't care about at new vehicle purchase point, as either they just don't think about it (its not in the brochure, and most people wouldn't understand the ramifications even if it was), or they think they'll have long since sold/traded the vehicle by the time the battery needs replacement.

All the specialized batteries I've seen for this type of application have been enormously expensive (think many thousands of $), but those were larger packs than the one in the 2.0T, so they may not be a good comparison. We're just now getting to the point where the hybrids are going to start aging out and battery replacements can be expected to be more common, so will economies of scale and multiple vendors come into play?

What is the expected lifetime of the 48V pack? 36,000 miles? 60,000 miles? 100,000 miles? No one knows. I'm guessing (?) it has the same 5/60 warranty as the rest of the powertrain, but the 48V battery may be excepted or have its own warranty, which could be shorter or longer than the standard, especially if the battery is considered a consumable/wear and tear item.

Overall, as long as the 48V battery has a decent life expectancy (say 100k miles), battery replacement cost is not a real concern to me, even at $1500. What stopped me was the added running costs and layers of added complexities of the 2.0T that made the few added MPG's not worth it. Some day in the near future, we'll have no choice but to accept those added complexities and costs, but as long as the 3.6L ESS is available, today is not that day.

Might be sooner then we think? lol. I inquired about ordering a 2019 2-door Rubicon a week ago. I was told no 3.6 for now. The 3.6 is on constraint for Rubicon and the 2.0 is the only option available to order (until further notice).

 

[Snowjeep]

Specialized hybrid battery replacement has always been a huge cost that most people don't care about at new vehicle purchase point, as either they just don't think about it (its not in the brochure, and most people wouldn't understand the ramifications even if it was), or they think they'll have long since sold/traded the vehicle by the time the battery needs replacement.

All the specialized batteries I've seen for this type of application have been enormously expensive (think many thousands of $), but those were larger packs than the one in the 2.0T, so they may not be a good comparison. We're just now getting to the point where the hybrids are going to start aging out and battery replacements can be expected to be more common, so will economies of scale and multiple vendors come into play?

What is the expected lifetime of the 48V pack? 36,000 miles? 60,000 miles? 100,000 miles? No one knows. I'm guessing (?) it has the same 5/60 warranty as the rest of the powertrain, but the 48V battery may be excepted or have its own warranty, which could be shorter or longer than the standard, especially if the battery is considered a consumable/wear and tear item.

Overall, as long as the 48V battery has a decent life expectancy (say 100k miles), battery replacement cost is not a real concern to me, even at $1500. What stopped me was the added running costs and layers of added complexities of the 2.0T that made the few added MPG's not worth it. Some day in the near future, we'll have no choice but to accept those added complexities and costs, but as long as the 3.6L ESS is available, today is not that day.

I totally agree that the biggest thing I don't like about the BSG is that it's more complexity in a vehicle where you really don't want to have issues while out in the wilderness. I get these type of things on sedans and standard commuter type vehicles but please not on the rigs we all use to 4 wheel out and about. I still can't fathom the idea of the supposed electric Wrangler. How the hell do you use that while out overlanding?

 

[Sean L]

I still can't fathom the idea of the supposed electric Wrangler. How the hell do you use that while out overlanding?

You would put gas in it and drive it like any other plug in hybrid when you can't plug it in. They were working on this 10 years ago with a JK Hybrid concept. Bankruptcy got in the way though.

 

[Snowjeep]

You would put gas in it and drive it like any other plug in hybrid when you can't plug it in. They were working on this 10 years ago with a JK Hybrid concept. Bankruptcy got in the way though.

Yeah the hybrid makes more sense but I'm talking about the full electric version that keeps being mentioned. I don't think we'll see it in 2020 but it sounds like they are indeed working towards one.

“In addition to the all-new mild hybrid Wrangler, a full plug in electric Jeep Wrangler will be available in 2020,” Manley said. “Furthering our commitment to all those who value responsible, sustainable enjoyment of the great outdoors, including future proofing this Wrangler for generations to come.”
https://www.quadratec.com/c/blog/jeep-announces-all-electric-wrangler-2020

 

[DocTwinkie]

I totally agree that the biggest thing I don't like about the BSG is that it's more complexity in a vehicle where you really don't want to have issues while out in the wilderness. I get these type of things on sedans and standard commuter type vehicles but please not on the rigs we all use to 4 wheel out and about. I still can't fathom the idea of the supposed electric Wrangler. How the hell do you use that while out overlanding?

I imagine the system in the wrangler will be very similar to the Pacifica. So basically you’ll get a certain number of miles all electric (great for daily drivers with short commutes) and you’ll get better gas mileage in the city with regenerative breaking.

I don’t see how overlanding will affect much beyond increased range. It’s not a Tesla.

 

[Kent5]

I imagine the system in the wrangler will be very similar to the Pacifica. So basically you’ll get a certain number of miles all electric (great for daily drivers with short commutes) and you’ll get better gas mileage in the city with regenerative breaking.

I don’t see how overlanding will affect much beyond increased range. It’s not a Tesla.

If I am not mistaken, I think SnowJeep was talking about the impracticality of an "EV" Wrangler, and NOT a "hybrid" Wrangler.

In general, an "EV" is a pure electric vehicle with NO gasoline engine whatsoever, while a "hybrid" has both gas and electric motors.

When a hybrid runs out of gas/power, no problem. Get some gas from your gas can (you do carry a spare gas can when overlanding, right?) and you're back in business. Or at worst, you have to hike back to the main road to get a gas can filled and you're on your way.

When an EV runs out of power, it's dead until it can be hooked up to a charger for a few hours. You can see how that might be impossible in the outback, given the total lack of charging stations in most offroad/remote areas, and the inability to carry spare 'fuel', or the inability to even have someone retrieve some fuel for you.

 

[DocTwinkie]

If I am not mistaken, I think SnowJeep was talking about the impracticality of an "EV" Wrangler, and NOT a "hybrid" Wrangler.

In general, an "EV" is a pure electric vehicle with NO gasoline engine whatsoever, while a "hybrid" has both gas and electric motors.

When a hybrid runs out of gas/power, no problem. Get some gas from your gas can (you do carry a spare gas can when overlanding, right?) and you're back in business. Or at worst, you have to hike back to the main road to get a gas can filled and you're on your way.

When an EV runs out of power, it's dead until it can be hooked up to a charger for a few hours. You can see how that might be impossible in the outback, given the total lack of charging stations in most offroad/remote areas, and the inability to carry spare 'fuel', or the inability to even have someone retrieve some fuel for you.

You’re right. My bad. I haven’t heard about a pure EV. I know they had the concept but I thought the only one planned was the plug in.

 

[TCogs1]

The 2.0 is $1000 option. Not taking the $1000 premium for the 2.0 into consideration. Fuel cost wise on a 2-door its probably close to a wash between a 3.6 running regular gas and a 2.0 running premium gas. It depends on where you live. In the Chicago area premium gas is about 10% more expensive but the 2.0 gets about 10% better gas mpg. Reports of MPG for the larger 4-door is about the same for both engines so no real benefit cost wise. The 2.0 would probably cost a little more to run due to requiring premium gas with the same MPG.

A benefit for the 2-door 2.0 is a little longer driving range between fill ups. A benefit for both the 2-door and 4-door is better high altitude performance from the forced induction of the turbo. The 2.0 feels a little stronger lower in the RPM band because there is a little more useable torque and the 2.0 torque curve is flatter. The power delivery of the 3.6 is more liner. The 2.0 feels a little more agile. Both drive really good.

We are in unchartered territory in terms of the 48v systems. There is truth to the saying less is more or keeping it simple. The 3.6 without the BSG or eTorque is proven and has less components to possible fail. It's probably safe to assume the 3.6 without BSG is the most reliable option today simply because there is less to possibly go wrong. Not to say the the 2.0 is not as reliable it's just new and unproven. The 2.0 has a lot of new technology and additional cooling components for the 48v battery. The eTorque battery is also expensive to replace if warranty does not cover it. The eTorque 48v battery is about $1500 today. I have no idea how long the 48v battery is covered for under the factory warranty? Or if it is covered under the Factory Extended FCA warranty?

There might not be a choice in the future because it looks like the the 3.6 will eventually have eTorque in the near future. Hopefully parts for eTorque will come down once the technology matures. Many other car companies are using the 48v hybrid technology.

I went back and forth on the 2.0 vs non etorque 3.6 until I read and learned about the warranties... You will be replacing paying for 2 batteries every 4-6 years in the etorques.... The 48 v battery is $1700 bucks... They can keep it...

Sponsored