3.0L “Tornado” Straight-Six Engine (GME T6) Coming to Various Jeep Models?

[Oilburner]

But another point --

Remember 1/2 of a 392 (6.4L) is still 3.2L in one bank. A straight 6 of 3.0L will be shorter if both have a similar bore/stroke ratio to get their displacement.

Yup, a twin-turbo I-6 would be Nasty in a Wrangler, especially a 2Dr. Thank you Bronco!

As a current owner of a 2006 LJ 4.0L w/ a flowmaster, I can say with authority that a straight six can sound VERY GOOD.

Sponsored

 

[abnormal4x4]

I just saw this...

https://www.hemmings.com/stories/20...s-tornado-ohc-six-and-thats-disappointing/amp

 

[Gunfighter]

I just saw this...

https://www.hemmings.com/stories/20...s-tornado-ohc-six-and-thats-disappointing/amp

" While Zatz said the GME T6 could appear across the Stellantis board in Alfa Romeo, Chrysler, Ram, Jeep, and even DS vehicles in both longitudinal and transverse configurations, his latest reports have the engine powering the 2024 Dodge Challenger instead of the Hemi. "

That'd be cool.

 

[Oilburner]

It might explain why Jeep is dragging it's feet on the 4xe Gladiator... GMET6_4xeGladiator anyone?

 

[abnormal4x4]

" While Zatz said the GME T6 could appear across the Stellantis board in Alfa Romeo, Chrysler, Ram, Jeep, and even DS vehicles in both longitudinal and transverse configurations, his latest reports have the engine powering the 2024 Dodge Challenger instead of the Hemi. "

That'd be cool.

I'm not a horsepower hound, but 400 horsepower with the possibility of another hundred from battery power kind of makes my dangly bits tingle.

 

[TheRaven]

Since it's in my field of expertise, I will simply point out that the idea of ICE phase-out in 10-15 years is absolutely ludicrous. No way, no chance. No amount of government subsidy or legislation is getting that done. Preparing our grid for an all-EV country is a 30 year project if we start now with unlimited funds and sufficient manpower. They haven't even started to talk about this yet so you're looking at at least a decade before it can even start.

Another thing no one has started to talk about - residential service upgrades. Residential service is in the 100-200amp range. That's enough to support one 50k charger per house if you turn everything else off (no A/C no heat...etc). For the typical 2-car household to be able to charge both vehicles overnight and actually LIVE in the house at the same time, EVERY SINGLE RESIDENTIAL SERVICE IN THE ENTIRE COUNTRY will need to be upgraded. That's a big problem.

The complete phase-out of ICE is not happening in our lifetimes. Period. Best case scenario we pass 50% by 2050...but man that's gonna take some money and action like yesterday.

 

[zakaron]

I think this is a smart move for Stellantis as a stop-gap engine while they work toward more mainstream EV solutions. As @TheRaven pointed out, this will be a long transition to even get a majority using EV. The power grid isn't ready for a sudden increase. But they can't keep the aging Pentastar around forever, nor can they afford to keep running V8s, as much as I love a good V8, fuel efficiency & emissions are not its strong points. Only specialized vehicles will likely keep V8s. General vehicle applications will keep falling back toward higher fuel economy and lower emission output.

Now what I like about this new engine platform is that the I6 does not require any external balancing, simpler design than a V engine, and much better sound than a V6 or I4. With direct injection, it should get respectable fuel mileage while the turbos provide the "fun" factor. My old '79 280ZX that I put an '82 turbo engine in (which is an I6) sounded fantastic when that T3/T4 hybrid spun up with a glasspack muffler. Can't say I've really heard a bad sounding I6 though.

My one concern is how they will address carbon build up. Will they use a combination MPFI with the DI? Will they incorporate a fancy PCV system with oil separator like some Audi's have? Or will they just rely on the consumer using quality oil? I really haven't heard issues with buildup on the 2.0, but I also don't know how many have high miles to really see an effect.

 

[beaups]

Not available in the 2 door, but the diesel has that power. Well, not the HP, but more than that for TQ. And, frankly, you don't need HP unless you are going to high speed. TQ is what gets you moving. HP keeps you moving faster.

That is not remotely true. Torque is meaningless unless rotational speed/available torque multiplication is factored with it, which is not coincidentally how you arrive at horsepower.

 

[DaveNH]

https://www.hemmings.com/stories/20...s-tornado-ohc-six-and-thats-disappointing/amp

 

[AFD]

https://www.hemmings.com/stories/20...s-tornado-ohc-six-and-thats-disappointing/amp

Interesting read, thanks for posting!

Tldr; the 3.0 Tornado straight six is "on the way" for the Jeep Wrangler, will push out 400HP (up to 500HP hybrid). And despite this amazingly good news, the author is bummed they're going to call it the GME T6 instead of the more nostalgic Tornado? Customers will call it what they want and for all I care, they can call it Pentastar Part-Duex, the Remix T6LMNOP. Just hoping it comes sooner rather than later (and for 2-doors as well!)

 

[Heimkehr]

Just hoping it comes sooner rather than later (and for 2-doors as well!)

I'm curious to know if the new inline 6 will make it into the Wrangler at all. It will still require sufficient cooling for the engine and the turbo(s). Using the 2.0T as the example here, there's very little room to spare already. Consider all the little gyrations that were necessary to increase the normally aspirated V6's cooling in the Gladiator so that a not-embarrassing tow capacity could be advertised.

Absolutely I'd like to see another inline 6 in a Wrangler, but the new engine will have an order of magnitude more plumbing, etc. than did the old 4.0L block.

 

[AFD]

Absolutely I'd like to see another inline 6 in a Wrangler, but the new engine will have an order of magnitude more plumbing, etc. than did the old 4.0L block.

Dunno, maybe the source (David Zatz of Stellpower.com) is mistaken, or perhaps the author of this article is reading too much into his mentions of Wrangler fitment? And the inline 6 would most likely be mounted transversely correct? Going from the 6.4L 392 down to ~3.0 will be saving some space, but this arrangement might make it easier to squeeze the turbo, intercooler and piping toward the front (or back) lower down in the engine bay. But yeah, all the JL engine bays seem pretty crowded already regardless of motor choice. I might not be the most mechanically inclined, but I'm even worse at playing Tetris!

 

[No IFS]

the article only mentioned the wrangler in comparing it to the 2.0 L turbo. Right now they’re saying it’s destined for the 2024 challenger as a hemi replacement. I guess it could replace the 392 wrangler at some point

 

[AFD]

the article only mentioned the wrangler in comparing it to the 2.0 L turbo. Right now they’re saying it’s destined for the 2024 challenger as a hemi replacement. I guess it could replace the 392 wrangler at some point

"..a brand-new highly engineered overhead-camshaft straight-six destined for Jeeps"

Maybe I was reading too much into the mention of Wrangler in this article and the original source (LINK), but seeing as the new engine is to replace the Hemi in the 2024 Challenger (according to the new article) and seeing as it's "destined for Jeeps" and the Wrangler already has a 392 variant, it seemed like that's what they were saying. Guess it could also be used in a Trackhawk, but that would be a major drop in power.

Perhaps it's just wishful thinking on my part, but imo, they should drop the aging Pentastar and replace it with the turbo i6 (and unfortunately, when they drop the 392 it will likely be replaced by the more powerful turbo i6 hybrid variant). So I'm picturing a line-up like 2.0T @270HP; i6T (3.6 replacement) @400HP; i6T/H @500HP (392 replacement). And I'd use the more relevant torque figures, but those weren't listed in either of the Tornado articles.

Of course, it would be great to have all of those engine options available for Jeep customers, but realistically I don't see that happening. Personally, I feel they should keep the 392 and just replace the v6 with the new i6, but that doesn't seem like that's where things are headed these days.

 

[RedundanT]

"..a brand-new highly engineered overhead-camshaft straight-six destined for Jeeps"

Maybe I was reading too much into the mention of Wrangler in this article and the original source (LINK), but seeing as the new engine is to replace the Hemi in the 2024 Challenger (according to the new article) and seeing as it's "destined for Jeeps" and the Wrangler already has a 392 variant, it seemed like that's what they were saying. Guess it could also be used in a Trackhawk, but that would be a major drop in power.

Perhaps it's just wishful thinking on my part, but imo, they should drop the aging Pentastar and replace it with the turbo i6 (and unfortunately, when they drop the 392 it will likely be replaced by the more powerful turbo i6 hybrid variant). So I'm picturing a line-up like 2.0T @270HP; i6T (3.6 replacement) @400HP; i6T/H @500HP (392 replacement). And I'd use the more relevant torque figures, but those weren't listed in either of the Tornado articles.

Of course, it would be great to have all of those engine options available for Jeep customers, but realistically I don't see that happening. Personally, I feel they should keep the 392 and just replace the v6 with the new i6, but that doesn't seem like that's where things are headed these days.

V8's are going the way of the Dodo, since that I6 is replacing the V8 I wouldn't hold my breathe waiting for it to make it's way in the Wrangler as the main engine. My guess would be the I6 will be your HALO vehicle engine and the majority of Wranglers will see turbo 4 hybrids to meet the EPA BS. It's sad, but in another couple years with the morons in charge you might not even have a gas engine Wrangler, or even Wrangler period.

Sponsored