3.6 WITH Etorque vs. 2.0 Turbo (no Etorque)

[Notorious]

menu is 15 pages long

There are endless dishes when the meat is fresh fish, lobster, crab and shrimps. The result? You must order, try and eat them all.

In like manner, you must buy several Jeeps: one 2.0L, one 3.6L, one 392, one diesel and one 4xE. Also 2dr and 4dr varieties. You may laugh but many members have several horses in the stable. And they’re not laughing.

Plus @TheRaven, here’s where leasing makes sense. Happy shopping!

Sponsored

 

[AnnDee4444]

It's a staple for the 2.0 vs 3.6 threads.

 

[Grayson]

What about reliability and capability? What will last longer? If the etorque relieves the engine of some work that might prolong engine longer. I could be wrong but makes sense to me. Also capability. When off-roading if I bang the battery, or go through a river, does the etorque system bring about new issues?
I can’t decide which to get, staling my order.....

 

[AnnDee4444]

What about reliability and capability? What will last longer? If the etorque relieves the engine of some work that might prolong engine longer. I could be wrong but makes sense to me. Also capability. When off-roading if I bang the battery, or go through a river, does the etorque system bring about new issues?
I can’t decide which to get, staling my order.....

Interesting thought about eTorque's stress on the motor. Lifetime idling should be reduced, but I bet it's (slightly) harder on the crankshaft. The rev-matching upshifts should also have a positive effect on transmission life.

On the flipside, a dead 48V battery or inverter could keep the vehicle from running. I haven't heard of any damaged batteries, but I do think there are a few cases of overheated inverters not charging the 12V battery (just my guess of what is wrong, they don't actually know yet).

 

[cjmdwyer]

Owned both. I prefer the 2.0. Much more get up and go around town. Much better going up hills as well. Live in AZ and going up to the rim was not fun at all with the 3.6 and no problem at all with the 2.0. Very happy with my 2.0!

 

[DuRsT]

I bought the 3.6 simply because I don’t trust the small displacement/turbo combo for longevity yet.

I haven’t had a problem with the 3.6 as of yet in any situation.

 

[hutchman]

FWIW, I owned s 3.6 manual 2dr and loved it. No complaints with power or economy. I currently own a 2.0L 4dt with an auto and love it also. The differences I see are the 3.6 was better off idle and the 2.0L is better mid range....think passing on a 2 lane.

But neither was better or worse enough in any area to warrant a negative recommendation. They both work great. On the other hand, the comment concerning elevation does have merit. I believe the 2.0L would have an advantage at high altitude.

Bottom line, buy the Jeep that makes you happy and drive the snot out of it.

 

[north53overland]

I test drove both engines here in Denver. I did not notice enough of a difference with the turbo to make me go that direction. However, I have never driven a 3.6 without the eTorque for a reference on the difference between the 3.6 without it. Would be curious to know if anyone has driven both to know if there is much difference between the 3.6 offerings.

My decision on the 3.6 was more long term. I expect at some point after the warranty runs out I may supercharge it as I did my 4.0 in my TJ. It is a fairly bolt on process and one I enjoyed working on and was very happy with the results. I also did not like the sound of the 4 banger turbo... Had to really wind it up and it sounded more like a ricer than a Jeep.

We drove the following between Jan 3-4, 2021:
- 2018 JL 3.6 (no etorque)
- 2021 JL 2.0 (no etorque)
- 2021 JL 3.6 WITH etorque

The 3.6 no etorque felt slow, sluggish and just old. Like a car from 15 years ago. Then we drove the 2.0T (no etorque) and coming from a heavily modified 2011 Audi TTS Stage 2 convertible, the 2.0T in the JL surprised me. No sports car, but still better pick up than I thought. Then took out the 3.6 etorque. It is a night and day difference to me compared to a non-etorque V6. It felt as quick as the 2.0T but know it would be better suited for towing a trailer, thus that is what we ordered in our '21 JLUR.

 

[MadDog27]

I just traded a 2018 JL with the manual 3.6 and enjoyed driving it around. I wanted a rubicon and test drove the 2.0T and loved the peppy ness of the engine. It is a bit noisier but I actually like it. I live in CO and the 2.0 does great up and down these mountain roads.

I enjoyed the 3.6 but also love my new 2.0T so like others have said, test drive both and you’ll know which suits you more.

Good luck, it’s a tough one and many of us have been there.

 

[ClaviusBase]

I bought a 2.0 recently. My last car was a challenger but I wanted something different and when I saw the 2-dr Jeep on the lot I liked had the 2.0, I was very skeptical and doubtful. I test drove it and within less than a minute my mind had changed. A month later and I still love it. That’s not a comparison to the v6 obviously, but it’s a good little engine.

 

[Twojayhawks]

When I ordered my 21 sport I tested both engines & liked both. FCA kind of made the decision for me with some more discounting (IIRC it was maybe $1000 or $1500) LESS to take the 2.0L. In the end I also preferred the 2.0L with NO etorque vs. the V6 that came with etorque. In my mind I justified the turbo engine as being less bazaar than Jeeps etorque. Lastly, unless something has changed, the best 0-60 is or was with the 2.0L over the V6 and even the diesel. Not that these are race cars but the 2.0L pulls quite strong. I'm using 87 & after 4000 miles averaging 25 mpg. Of coarse I'll be singing a different tune if I run into longevity issues with the 2.0L down the road.

 

[JeepVT]

If there are longevity issue with the 2.0 I will throw in a HEMI, but FCA will have quite the class action on their hands if it is widespread and common.

 

[Rumplemenz]

Lease - 2.0
Purchase - 3.6

this is what a friend stressed to me. Hes a legit mechanic who has been working on wranglers for more than 20 yrs. His only reason on leaning to the 3.6 was the 2.0 just doesnt have enough history yet. Not enough data etc to justify its selection

 

[AnnDee4444]

Lease - 2.0
Purchase - 3.6

this is what a friend stressed to me. Hes a legit mechanic who has been working on wranglers for more than 20 yrs. His only reason on leaning to the 3.6 was the 2.0 just doesnt have enough history yet. Not enough data etc to justify its selection

At what point will the 2.0 have enough history to be seen a reliable option? We're currently in the 4th model year for the JL, with parts of the engine having been in production for 7 model years.

I am far more concerned with eTorque failing than the 2.0.

 

[beaups]

Lease - 2.0
Purchase - 3.6

this is what a friend stressed to me. Hes a legit mechanic who has been working on wranglers for more than 20 yrs. His only reason on leaning to the 3.6 was the 2.0 just doesnt have enough history yet. Not enough data etc to justify its selection

I went with the 3.6 myself (2.0 was a non-starter due to no 6MT for it) but I don't understand all this history talk on the 3.6. The 3.6 that's in the JL is brand new...tons of new components and (very) high compression. I'm not worried about it by any means, I just don't think all the "tried and true" talk is accurate.

Sponsored