3.6 not going away?

[aldo98229]

You can already get it in an FCA vehicle - the Grand Wagoneer.

Right. But that’s a brand-new vehicle.

There are many other vehicles developed years ago that still use the 3.6 V6, like Challenger, Charger, 300, Pacifica, etc.

Sponsored

 

[Willing&Able]

Right. But that’s a brand-new vehicle.

There are many other vehicles developed years ago that still use the 3.6 V6, like Challenger, Charger, 300, Pacifica, etc.

Still a pre-existing vehicle. Stellantis stated back in the spring it would replace many of the V-8's in the line up:

Stellantis states, “The Hurricane twin-turbo I-6 is the primary internal combustion power plant of the future in North America for vehicles using the STLA Large [muscle car and 4WD SUV] and STLA Frame [Ram truck] platforms.”

 

[aldo98229]

Still a pre-existing vehicle. Stellantis stated back in the spring it would replace many of the V-8's in the line up:

Stellantis states, “The Hurricane twin-turbo I-6 is the primary internal combustion power plant of the future in North America for vehicles using the STLA Large [muscle car and 4WD SUV] and STLA Frame [Ram truck] platforms.”

Are you just being argumentative...?

 

[Willing&Able]

Are you just being argumentative...?

Not at all! I'm not thrilled about most of the JL engines and I think the Hurricane I6 engine would be a great engine to consolidate the 2.0, 3.6, 392, and 3.0D engines with their SO and HO variants. It harkens back to the much loved (and long lasting) 4.0 I6 from the TJ/LJ years.

I don't believe the statement that the I6 won't go into the JL (or future models) is likely inaccurate, that's all I'm saying.

 

[aldo98229]

Not at all! I'm not thrilled about most of the JL engines and I think the Hurricane I6 engine would be a great engine to consolidate the 2.0, 3.6, 392, and 3.0D engines with their SO and HO variants. It harkens back to the much loved (and long lasting) 4.0 I6 from the TJ/LJ years.

I don't believe the statement that the I6 won't go into the JL (or future models) is likely inaccurate, that's all I'm saying.

That’s fair.

Unfortunately, whatever we wish has little bearing on things.

Two facts to keep in mind:

1. Stellantis continues to produce and sell vehicles that were originally developed ten years before the I-6 was launched. The chances that the two will work with each other are pretty slim
2. The recent announcement that Stellantis plans to continue production of the 3.6 V6 signals that it cannot accommodate the I-6 on every vehicle. If it did, it would simply get rid of the V6

I have no idea if JL is one the vehicles that won’t take the I-6. But the fact that JL started development well before I-6 did, and how tight everything looks under JL’s hood, strongly suggest to me that it is unlikely to fit. As I recall, FCA struggled to fit the 8-speed on JL. It had to extend the wheelbase by 1.5 inches, thoroughly redesign the firewall and the floorpan, and delay launch by six months.

Hopefully, the I-6 was included of JL’s mid-cycle redesign plan...

 

[LCW]

You can already get it in an FCA vehicle - the Grand Wagoneer.

Yeah and it's $2K over a 392 (6.4) in the GW's case... no thanks.

 

[Cutterone]

I'm aware of the superiority of the 8sp auto, but to those of us who still cling to the fast receding glory days of the manual, lets hope the 3.6 sticks around for at least the rest of the lifecycle of the JL, for no dout they aren't going to bother to certify a manual with the I6, hell our present 6sp can barely handle the 260 ft/lbs of the 3.6, so a whole new manual tranny would be needed, not happening...I plan on keeping my 6sp Sahara for as long as she keeps together, she is now extinct looking at the 2023 order guides...

 

[aldo98229]

Yeah and it's $2K over a 392 (6.4) in the GW's case... no thanks.

Someone in FCA‘s Pricing team must be on drugs...

 

[Traveller128]

The auto manufactures admitted that e torque and ESS do not help miles per gallon. How do we know this. With the chip shortage they started shipping vehicles without ESS and E torque and the mpg on window stickers stayed the same ? When they were called out on it they said oh it doesn’t help mpg it helps emissions. Lol who knows what’s true.

It helps emission credits. The stop/start effect on emissions is negligible, but it's there. It's a very small percentage in real life usage, and the secondary battery system is lousy on a lot of vehicles using it. Battery life around 2-3 years, $200 battery, diagnosis, reset of battery systems, etc. If an entire city full of people is using the tech, it will cut down on emissions somewhere in the low single digits percentage wise. I believe they told us 2-3% at school. The fuel mileage difference in city conditions, is in the 1-2% range, pretty much margin of error. And it only works while the secondary battery is charged enough to run the vehicle systems with the engine off. Once it goes down enough from multiple events, it shuts off until it's charged again.

Etorque, and similar systems, eliminate the starter. The large drive belt works both ways, starting and charging both. The vehicle won't start without the 48 volt battery, there's no 12V starter. In working on these things for a couple years now, I can say that we've had a couple generator failures strand the vehicles, but mostly the 48V/12V charging crossover and software issues have caused a LOT of vehicles to be towed in with dead batteries.

Word of warning, do NOT let a tow company jump your MHEV. They don't know how, and they can damage the 48V if done improperly. Just had one of those a couple weeks ago. Customer on the hook for additional damage, was a 12v battery problem and the tow company hooked up to the 48V. If putting a jump pack on the 12V (not another vehicle) doesn't work, do not attempt anything with the 48V.

Been having a large number of early failures with AGM 12V batteries lately, 6 month or less life spans, so keep an eye open for that if you have one. They don't like to be discharged, so if they get much below 50% the life reduces RAPIDLY. In my world, they're all covered under basic warranty, so no cost to customer, but it's still being stranded, towed and stuck waiting at a shop.

 

[OSCAR II]

It helps emission credits. The stop/start effect on emissions is negligible, but it's there. It's a very small percentage in real life usage, and the secondary battery system is lousy on a lot of vehicles using it. Battery life around 2-3 years, $200 battery, diagnosis, reset of battery systems, etc. If an entire city full of people is using the tech, it will cut down on emissions somewhere in the low single digits percentage wise. I believe they told us 2-3% at school. The fuel mileage difference in city conditions, is in the 1-2% range, pretty much margin of error. And it only works while the secondary battery is charged enough to run the vehicle systems with the engine off. Once it goes down enough from multiple events, it shuts off until it's charged again.

Etorque, and similar systems, eliminate the starter. The large drive belt works both ways, starting and charging both. The vehicle won't start without the 48 volt battery, there's no 12V starter. In working on these things for a couple years now, I can say that we've had a couple generator failures strand the vehicles, but mostly the 48V/12V charging crossover and software issues have caused a LOT of vehicles to be towed in with dead batteries.

Word of warning, do NOT let a tow company jump your MHEV. They don't know how, and they can damage the 48V if done improperly. Just had one of those a couple weeks ago. Customer on the hook for additional damage, was a 12v battery problem and the tow company hooked up to the 48V. If putting a jump pack on the 12V (not another vehicle) doesn't work, do not attempt anything with the 48V.

Been having a large number of early failures with AGM 12V batteries lately, 6 month or less life spans, so keep an eye open for that if you have one. They don't like to be discharged, so if they get much below 50% the life reduces RAPIDLY. In my world, they're all covered under basic warranty, so no cost to customer, but it's still being stranded, towed and stuck waiting at a shop.

There is no 12v starter on a jeep with eTorque? Everything I've read says different.

Curious, where does one connect to try to jump the 48v battery?

 

[Billkowski]

There is no 12v starter on a jeep with eTorque? Everything I've read says different.

Curious, where does one connect to try to jump the 48v battery?

On the e-torque there is a regular starter for cold starts and the regular battery offers the juice, after that the e-torque system re-starts the engine at stops. I don't think you can or would want to jump the 48v battery.

 

[No IFS]

And E torque is disabled when you disable ESS. E torque Helps with the auto start stop to make it seamless. That’s it. It’s only for comfort.

 

[John VonJeep]

And E torque is disabled when you disable ESS. E torque Helps with the auto start stop to make it seamless. That’s it. It’s only for comfort.

There's also the first half-turn of the tire and the transmission shift smoothing.

 

[Traveller128]

There is no 12v starter on a jeep with eTorque? Everything I've read says different.

Curious, where does one connect to try to jump the 48v battery?

There is no 12V starting once it's started the first time, sorry. I work on other MHEV's (couple brands) and they aren't using a 12V at all.

And using the 48V starter/generator is smooth as heck. Easy, seamless restarts, it's a direct drive system that spins it up fast.

 

[No IFS]

Also note : If you’re ever planning on adding a supercharger the Non-E torque V6 is your only choice.

Sponsored