2.0 go...................Not that I bought my 2.0 for the MPG but my average at the moment is 21-22 commuting back and forth to work. Better than the 10 I got in my TJ! Hahahahaha
more like 3.6 go2.0 go...................
![]()
3.6 go.......................
![]()
more like 3.6 go
![]()
Ohhhh, because we all average 85 mph....Set the cruise control at 85mph and get back to me. The JT gets the same fuel economy. Both heavy builds, big tires, 3.5" lifts, etc. The box into the wind at speed will never be good for fuel economy, but even at current fuel prices my time is worth far more. The 2.0t guys all say they get 20mpg... which is why I posted my mpg for both under the same use. The 4xe is irrelevant to the discussion at hand though. The only advantage the 3.6L has over the 2.0t ICE JL is the sound... which still isn't good.
Yeah my long term average over both 3.6's was 19mpg and with the 2.0's it's been 19.5mpg. That's more "city" than "highway"...something like a 70/30 split. But the difference seems to be consistent, it will drop about 1.5 mpg in the dead of winter and i'll get roughly 2mpg better in spring/fall highway only drives...but long term is always about a 0.5mpg difference.JL - 8 speed auto, 2.0, 4.10s, 37s - 19-21 MPG, depending on temps and amount of highway driving, have seen up to about 23 MPG, but that's not consistent with my typical driving loop.
When I hear people using kids or acting like children as an insult here, or things like excuse me the adults are talking it reminds me of good times with @TheRaven As soon as he started losing an argument that was his default.I do not identify as a birthing person, I claim nobody here, not even me
It's so ridiculous, cause I like to think I definitely rate tweenager instead of "kid". I cuss way more than a 5 year old.When I hear people using kids or acting like children as an insult here, or things like excuse me the adults are talking it reminds me of good times with @TheRaven As soon as he started losing an argument that was his default.
Not identical but close enough for arguments sake. 38s vs 39s, weight within a few hundred pounds, lift heights the same, etc. I know you east coast guys don't have the room/legal ability to drive as fast, so of course you'll get better fuel economy. Out here the posted speed limits are between 70 and 80 and even the big rigs are rolling that fast. Theoretically both engines would benefit the same by driving slower so I'll still bet on the 2.0t getting 30% better fuel economy. It accelerates quicker, pulls way harder at altitude, and seems to have similar reliability. In my experience the sound is the only draw back, and if the 3.6L sounded like a Hemi that might mean something. It doesn't. Therefore I would choose the 2.0t in the OPs mythical, all other things being equal scenario.Ohhhh, because we all average 85 mph....
Your 2.0L and 3.6L were identical builds, down to vehicle weight, gear ratio, and the tire size, brand, and PSI?
He lives in SoCalI know you east coast guys don't have the room/legal ability to drive as fast, so of course you'll get better fuel economy.
I feel pretty smart when my wife says, “”You’re acting like a 6th grader”.It's so ridiculous, cause I like to think I definitely rate tweenager instead of "kid". I cuss way more than a 5 year old.