Sponsored

2020 2.0 difference.

jameslavis

Well-Known Member
First Name
James
Joined
Jun 18, 2019
Threads
30
Messages
161
Reaction score
70
Location
toronto, ontario
Vehicle(s)
Jeep JL Unlimited Sport S
What’s the difference in the 2.0 for 2020? Not sure why they would change it after a year
Sponsored

 

Dkretden

Well-Known Member
First Name
David
Joined
Jan 29, 2019
Threads
57
Messages
2,533
Reaction score
3,527
Location
Denver, CO
Vehicle(s)
2020 JLUR 3.6L
What’s the difference in the 2.0 for 2020? Not sure why they would change it after a year
It’s actually been two model years and they are NOT changing anything for the Sahara. That engine option remains the 2.0 etorque engine.

The rubicon will get the same 2.0T engine but without the etorque and it’s “complicated” cooling systems/48v battery. Instead of the etorque, the rubicon will get the same 2.0t engine but with ess (and the little motorcycle battery that the 3.6l ess engine has). The 2.0T engine with ESS is the “export” version of this engine as well (I.e. this is not a new configuration).

Hope that helps. Several threads that can give you more details.
 
OP
OP

jameslavis

Well-Known Member
First Name
James
Joined
Jun 18, 2019
Threads
30
Messages
161
Reaction score
70
Location
toronto, ontario
Vehicle(s)
Jeep JL Unlimited Sport S
Ya my worry is that they dumped this engine because it’s a lemon. I’ve had no issues but this sucker is expensive. Want to make sure I’m not setup for future issues.
 

Kyanche

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 17, 2019
Threads
7
Messages
1,334
Reaction score
1,373
Location
California
Vehicle(s)
2020 Wrangler Unlimited Rubicon
Ya my worry is that they dumped this engine because it’s a lemon. I’ve had no issues but this sucker is expensive. Want to make sure I’m not setup for future issues.
Anecdotally, I've seen fewer complaints about it vs the 3.6. That doesn't make much sense, of course.
 

AnnDee4444

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2019
Threads
49
Messages
4,685
Reaction score
6,273
Location
Vehicle(s)
'18 JLR 2.0
Anecdotally, I've seen fewer complaints about it vs the 3.6. That doesn't make much sense, of course.
That's because you are in the 2.0 forum. There are plenty of complaints about the 2.0 in the 3.6 section. ;)

I bet they kept the BSG on the Sahara because it helped more on the CAFE numbers. The BSG is probably not as effective on a Rubicon, and too expensive for a Sport. I also noticed that this means there is no more 2-door with BSG.
 

Sponsored

Dkretden

Well-Known Member
First Name
David
Joined
Jan 29, 2019
Threads
57
Messages
2,533
Reaction score
3,527
Location
Denver, CO
Vehicle(s)
2020 JLUR 3.6L
Ya my worry is that they dumped this engine because it’s a lemon. I’ve had no issues but this sucker is expensive. Want to make sure I’m not setup for future issues.
No worries. They are still making the 2.0T etorque. They didn’t “dump” it. To me, It seems far too early to tell if this engine will have long-term issues. Go enjoy your Jeep!

The 2.0T seems to be an engine that Jeep intends to use long term. It will have some variants but, it does seem to be a key to their line up over the next decade.
 
OP
OP

jameslavis

Well-Known Member
First Name
James
Joined
Jun 18, 2019
Threads
30
Messages
161
Reaction score
70
Location
toronto, ontario
Vehicle(s)
Jeep JL Unlimited Sport S
I’m not of the level to fix myself so I’m ok with the complexity. It’s a commuter vehicle so I’m in love with the 2.0
 

FUHL

Well-Known Member
First Name
Robert
Joined
Apr 4, 2018
Threads
16
Messages
830
Reaction score
1,802
Location
Sandpoint Idaho
Website
cmott426.wixsite.com
Vehicle(s)
2013 F-150 Ecoboost 2018 2-door Rubicon 2013 Range Rover Evoque
Occupation
CAD Drafter/Engineer
Vehicle Showcase
1
Complexity, the are adding to the V6 and removing it from the 2.0L Except Sahara. Why?
 

Ksvette

Well-Known Member
First Name
Matt
Joined
Jul 2, 2019
Threads
14
Messages
102
Reaction score
193
Location
Manhattan, KS
Vehicle(s)
2018 jlu sport s
Wow, I am glad I got an 18 then. I live that little turbo, and not sure it would be as quick without the etorque, or as efficient.
 

veld

Active Member
First Name
Lebreton
Joined
Oct 6, 2018
Threads
6
Messages
29
Reaction score
2
Location
France
Vehicle(s)
JL
I have the 2L export model on my Rubicon without the BSG.
In europe the 3.6 is not available but the 2L with little electronics is really efficient.
 

Sponsored

Dkretden

Well-Known Member
First Name
David
Joined
Jan 29, 2019
Threads
57
Messages
2,533
Reaction score
3,527
Location
Denver, CO
Vehicle(s)
2020 JLUR 3.6L
Wow, I am glad I got an 18 then. I live that little turbo, and not sure it would be as quick without the etorque, or as efficient.
Fair point.

Folks from Europe who have the 2.0 with ESS but not BSG (I.e. the “new” 2020 domestic US/Canada config) report that the Jeep is “peppy and quick” (my words). That said, they don’t have a reference since they have not been able to compare their vehicle to the 2.0 BSG.

I will be interested in seeing if there is an MPG difference. I am going to bet that the 2.0 without etorque gets a little less MPG and that is why the “standard” rubicon spec now has 255/75/17 tires (same as the export). Those tires might get the vehicle a slightly better mileage rating and therefore bump it back up to where it was.

In the US these days, it’s all about CAFE.
 

Rudolph Hart

Well-Known Member
First Name
John
Joined
Feb 23, 2019
Threads
18
Messages
3,491
Reaction score
25,664
Location
Cheshire UK
Vehicle(s)
2018 JLUR GME Mojito!
Occupation
Semi retired
Fair point.

Folks from Europe who have the 2.0 with ESS but not BSG (I.e. the “new” 2020 domestic US/Canada config) report that the Jeep is “peppy and quick” (my words). That said, they don’t have a reference since they have not been able to compare their vehicle to the 2.0 BSG.

I will be interested in seeing if there is an MPG difference. I am going to bet that the 2.0 without etorque gets a little less MPG and that is why the “standard” rubicon spec now has 255/75/17 tires (same as the export). Those tires might get the vehicle a slightly better mileage rating and therefore bump it back up to where it was.

In the US these days, it’s all about CAFE.
To reply to this for you...my UK JLUR, which has the smaller tyres,is doing just under 24mpg, but that’s UK gallons, so just under 20mpg US gallons. I think it’s a little less than the eTorque engine. I live in a semi rural area and do very little city driving.
 

DanW

Well-Known Member
First Name
Dan
Joined
Mar 2, 2017
Threads
159
Messages
8,404
Reaction score
11,073
Location
Indiana
Vehicle(s)
21 JLUR, 18JLUR, 08JKUR, 15 Renegade, 04 WJ
Vehicle Showcase
2
Ya my worry is that they dumped this engine because it’s a lemon. I’ve had no issues but this sucker is expensive. Want to make sure I’m not setup for future issues.
I've seen no evidence of it being a lemon. Quite the contrary. It looks to be off to a great start. I posted in another thread an educated guess as to why it is not on the Rubicon. That has to do with the charging needed for the Etorque. I suspect that when rock crawling, it uses up the batteries pretty fast, as you are constantly stopping and going, and after awhile, there may not be enough power to engage it. The engine, at low RPM's, may not be allowing the alternator to produce enough power to overcome the draw. I'd love to pick a Jeep engineer's brain to see if there might be this kind of issue, or if it only exists in my imagination. If there are any 2.0 Etorque owners who've done some extensive off-roading, please chime in on your experiences!

That's totally a guess, though. The only thing that would explain it being just on the Sahara would be that Saharas probably spend more time on the road, being that they seem to be the more luxury oriented trim level. Before the Sahara folks jump me and beat me up, I know, I see plenty of built Saharas off road.

Like I said, I may be wrong, but there has to be some technical reason they aren't putting it on the Rubicon, being that it is the top trim level or at least equal in trim to the Sahara. Reliability isn't something I suspect because we'd see it all over this forum. I've mainly seen great praise of its power and fuel economy.

I do wonder, though, if the elimination of Etorque puts the 3.6 (non BSG) at least on par with the 2.0 for fuel economy?
 

DanW

Well-Known Member
First Name
Dan
Joined
Mar 2, 2017
Threads
159
Messages
8,404
Reaction score
11,073
Location
Indiana
Vehicle(s)
21 JLUR, 18JLUR, 08JKUR, 15 Renegade, 04 WJ
Vehicle Showcase
2
Fair point.

Folks from Europe who have the 2.0 with ESS but not BSG (I.e. the “new” 2020 domestic US/Canada config) report that the Jeep is “peppy and quick” (my words). That said, they don’t have a reference since they have not been able to compare their vehicle to the 2.0 BSG.

I will be interested in seeing if there is an MPG difference. I am going to bet that the 2.0 without etorque gets a little less MPG and that is why the “standard” rubicon spec now has 255/75/17 tires (same as the export). Those tires might get the vehicle a slightly better mileage rating and therefore bump it back up to where it was.

In the US these days, it’s all about CAFE.
Wow, I didn't see that the Rubi goes to 255 tires. That's a shocker, to me. If Cafe related, it tells me that the Rubi's make up quite a healthy percentage of the overall Wrangler sales.

If they keep the high fenders as standard on the Rubi, those 255's are going to look tiny!
 

Ksvette

Well-Known Member
First Name
Matt
Joined
Jul 2, 2019
Threads
14
Messages
102
Reaction score
193
Location
Manhattan, KS
Vehicle(s)
2018 jlu sport s
Fair point.

Folks from Europe who have the 2.0 with ESS but not BSG (I.e. the “new” 2020 domestic US/Canada config) report that the Jeep is “peppy and quick” (my words). That said, they don’t have a reference since they have not been able to compare their vehicle to the 2.0 BSG.

I will be interested in seeing if there is an MPG difference. I am going to bet that the 2.0 without etorque gets a little less MPG and that is why the “standard” rubicon spec now has 255/75/17 tires (same as the export). Those tires might get the vehicle a slightly better mileage rating and therefore bump it back up to where it was.

In the US these days, it’s all about CAFE.
CAFE is certainly a big deal. Glad to hear it is peppy without, and I don't doubt it is. Difference would only be on the low end.
Sponsored

 
 



Top