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

[Kent5]

I have. I’m still not sure what to expect.

As far as the 3.6bsg if that gets me good mileage then hey I’m down. I would imagine it wouldn’t be quite as good as the 2.0 though.

If my math is correct -- from purely an MPG standpoint, not sure if the 3.6BSG is really a wise move.

Assume the BSG gets you an avg 2mpg increase, while it costs you $1000 up front for the option (just a guess) -- that means at today's fuel prices you won't break even just on the simple cost of the option until after 70,000 miles. And since the $1700 48v battery reportedly has a 80,000 mile warranty, you might be right back at square 1 (behind, actually) on the "recouping the option cost" curve if that special BSG-only battery needs replacement soon after the warranty is up.

No one knows how long that 48v battery will last, but as all batteries do 'wear out' after a time, it might be a reasonable guess that the warranty period provided (80k miles) is the manufacturer's estimate at battery life for the unit.

Again, this eval is just from a 'gas-saving' perspective. The BSG supposedly can provide more torque under certain very low RPM (less than 1500RPM according to FCA info) conditions too, and that may be worth the extra costs involved, at least to some owners.

Sponsored

 

[LincolnSixAlpha]

My question is does anyone know if the new 3.6l BSG (25G) will be available when the Nov banks open? Has anyone been able to order one yet at all? Will it be worth it? (ok so, 3 questions). I was originally going to get the regular 3.6L Penta with the 8 speed auto (people on the forums have been pretty happy with it) but figure I might as well wait a couple more weeks...if it will be available. Hoping it increases MPG significantly more than the 3.6 ESS.

Thanks!

My honest opinion, or rather 2 cents. No. Wouldnt waste a dime, nor my time on any BSG nonsnse. You have the complication of another electrical system, battery, added weight, and essentially a generator that you will need to provide service to at some point. Like ESS it's a stop gap to help manufacturers achieve EPA fleet numbers to some degree or another, but providing you, the consumer, with a no, to negative value. I'm not sure of the cost of the BSG 3.6, but I guarantee you that whatever it is, you'll not likely justify the cost upcharge in the marginal mileage saving's it might give you.

 

[offcamber]

Honestly, if a BSG powerplant was the only option, I'd shop elsewhere. It's just a problem waiting to happen on the trail. No thanks, I cant wait to laugh at some fool with that big ass battery bashed into a rock on the trail.

 

[LincolnSixAlpha]

Funny I had nearly the exact opposite experience. I drove similarly optioned Rubicons back to back with the 2.0L and the 3.6L. Here's some observations of mine:

• The 2.0L is quicker than the 3.6L, but it wasn't a drastic change. At atltitude (5600ft) both hit 65mph somewhere between 1/2-3/4 the length of the on ramp. The 3.6L was still able to chirp tires leaving a red light with the auto.
• The 2.0L sounds and feels rougher than the V6 which feels significantly smoother. Also seems like the trans tuning was much better matched with the V6. Overall just felt more refined. I was able to trick the 2.0L+8spd a couple of times and it guessed its gear incorrectly and had to shift again.
• Start/Stop was rougher with the 3.6 than the 2.0 which felt near invisible. Still not too bad.
• 3.6L sounds smoother and less thrashy than the 2.0. But this is just personal opinion.

I was originally set on the turbo, but after driving both I'm ordering the V6. I am no turbo hater either, I am so happy it is an option for the Jeep. But compared to the 2.5L in my Subaru, it seems like it needs more refinement before I'd buy it. I bet a tune would help tremendously with shift points.

I think the take away here is that the 3.6 v6 has been long developed, and run through its paces. As I mentioned on some other posts, I'm used to BMW motors, in particular, the Inline 6's that they've been long developing, Specifically the N55 motor in my last car, which is an excellent engine. That said, this is my first Jeep (and Chrysler/Mopar) product. I'm very much impressed with the Pentastar motor, in fact, I've watched that lonely build video on Youtube a number of times in attempts to understand the process, and methods used to build it.

It's quite an impressive motor in my humble opinion. As for the 4-banger, I simply wanted less complexity (no turbo, no BSG) and also because I refuse to simply drive a 4 cylinder vehicle. Just my preference.

 

[baysta]

Honestly, if a BSG powerplant was the only option, I'd shop elsewhere. It's just a problem waiting to happen on the trail. No thanks, I cant wait to laugh at some fool with that big ass battery bashed into a rock on the trail.

Doesn't that mean the 2.0T BSG would be straight garbage for off-roading, since it has turbos AND the BSG system? I think it's a bit much to call the owners of those vehicles with the 4-cyl engine who go offroading fools.

 

[unixfool]

Doesn't Jeep take all of their Wranglers to Moab and other harsh trails for pre-production testing? In fact, don't they take their pre-prod models all over the world to test them in different environments? I thought I saw a few reviews of the 2.0L engine at Moab. No battery bashing was reported and there was a crapload of rock sliding. In fact, you would think that someone would've reported any such instances by now, especially since the 2019 JLs are about to go into production.

 

[The_Phew]

On a fundamental level, the BSG system is actually more reliable/robust than the 3.6 ESS:
-It's a 48V system, instead of 12V. That means 75% less current is required to restart the engine (AFAIK, the lithium battery is used for ESS restarts, and the lead-acid for cold starts). Current=heat=degradation. So expect longer starter life.
-Same goes in regeneration mode; alternators are one of the most common failure items on modern automobiles, because of the low voltage=high current eventually cooking them. The BSG regenerates at 4x the voltage, so it should be more robust than a 12v alternator.
-BSG regeneration reduces wear on your brake pads/rotors; this has always been true for hybrids. Brake jobs ain't cheap.
-Internal combustion engines experience the greatest wear at low RPM, high load conditions (especially before the oil has warmed up). The BSG system supplies torque at these low RPMs, relieving load from the engine where it most 'needs a break'

That said, this is FCA we are talking about, so even though the BSG system was engineered by Bosch, I have very little confidence that FCA is implementing it properly. The fires on the 2.0 due to the faulty connection to the 48V battery are exhibit 1A of that.

If we're talking about a German or Japanese company, I'm totally on board with 48V mild hybrid tech. But FCA struggles with things that were mastered decades ago (like welding steel frames together, or keeping water out of the cabin), so I have my doubts in this case.

 

[Vedder]

I couldnt disagree more with any of what you have said. Also proves youve never drove any jeep previous to a JL. Furthermore , its posts like this that make it so frustrating what so many people just buying jeeps for the first
Time in the brands HUGE linage and nitpick about their 50k purchase...

Have you not noticed that no one could care less about anything you have to say on any topic in any thread. Pay attention man. That speaks volumes. Smh

Sponsored