3.6L V6 24V VVT eTorque Engine vs. 3.6L V6 24V VVT Engine Upg I With Start Stop

[DanW]

How is your gas mileage with this engine?

I just completed a round trip to Florida and averaged right at 18mpg. I'll get the exact number soon, but I had some tanks at over 19 and some in the 17's. We drove 75-80mph 90% of the time. There was a stint in Florida at 85 just to keep up with the knuckleheads on I75.

Sponsored

 

[Scratch]

I picked up the new JLR this weekend with the 3.6 etorque because it was the only way I could get it. First let me say I didn't want the etorque and wasn't happy that is the only way I could find the JLR.
I was very pleasantly surprised!
It is smoother, quieter and feels quicker than either my JT or the wife's JL without etorque.
The hill decent seemed more positive.
The start stop... I press that button everytime I get in one of the jeeps. With the etorque engine I don't feel like I have to. It is almost seamless.
I was really impressed! Now I just hope the extra complexity of the system holds up over time
Your mileage may vary!

 

[JeepinJason33]

Your thoughts are exactly the same as mine after first purchasing. After 16,000 miles, I am still pleased!

 

[DanW]

As much as I love the Etorque and was fine now with using ESS with it, I did hear from my friend who was an engineer on the original Pentastar's design team a few days ago. To quote him directly, "I wouldn't use it. It eats up bearings real bad." He said Etorque will be going away but is not sure exactly when. It's a bummer because he said they worked really hard on it. They certainly nailed it as far as function.

It'll be interesting to see how the long-term durability works out with the bearings. I've no doubt the rest of the system is robust. Maybe the advanced coatings they put on some of the engine internals will prevent some of that wear. He doesn't believe they will, at least with the bearings. But who knows, maybe he's wrong on that?

 

[JeepinJason33]

As much as I love the Etorque and was fine now with using ESS with it, I did hear from my friend who was an engineer on the original Pentastar's design team a few days ago. To quote him directly, "I wouldn't use it. It eats up bearings real bad." He said Etorque will be going away but is not sure exactly when. It's a bummer because he said they worked really hard on it. They certainly nailed it as far as function.

It'll be interesting to see how the long-term durability works out with the bearings. I've no doubt the rest of the system is robust. Maybe the advanced coatings they put on some of the engine internals will prevent some of that wear. He doesn't believe they will, at least with the bearings. But who knows, maybe he's wrong on that?

I have yet to hear of bearing issues and this engine is in the Ram as well.

 

[DanW]

I have yet to hear of bearing issues and this engine is in the Ram as well.

What's the highest mileage you've seen on one? I'd be thrilled to hear from someone with 200k that's used it consistently. But I haven't seen one with even 50k on it yet, although my wife is racking up the miles quick enough that it might not be long, lol.

Just passing along what he said. It's not something that'll show up at 20k miles. I think he's talking quite a bit further down the road than that. If someone doesn't keep vehicles for much more than 100k, I'd bet it won't be an issue.

I'll try and get him to elaborate on what kind of effect it would have on the lifespan of an engine with typical use.

 

[Gunfighter]

As much as I love the Etorque and was fine now with using ESS with it, I did hear from my friend who was an engineer on the original Pentastar's design team a few days ago. To quote him directly, "I wouldn't use it. It eats up bearings real bad." He said Etorque will be going away but is not sure exactly when. It's a bummer because he said they worked really hard on it. They certainly nailed it as far as function.

It'll be interesting to see how the long-term durability works out with the bearings. I've no doubt the rest of the system is robust. Maybe the advanced coatings they put on some of the engine internals will prevent some of that wear. He doesn't believe they will, at least with the bearings. But who knows, maybe he's wrong on that?

I know of a number of Ram work trucks that have the 3.6 Etorque with 130k+ - no issues.

 

[DanW]

I know of a number of Ram work trucks that have the 3.6 Etorque with 130k+ - no issues.

That's good to hear! Next milestone would be 150k.

 

[AFD]

As much as I love the Etorque and was fine now with using ESS with it, I did hear from my friend who was an engineer on the original Pentastar's design team a few days ago. To quote him directly, "I wouldn't use it. It eats up bearings real bad." He said Etorque will be going away but is not sure exactly when. It's a bummer because he said they worked really hard on it. They certainly nailed it as far as function.

That would make a lot of sense if the new GME 3.0TT S.O. i6 will eventually be replacing the 3.6 Pentastar, afaik, neither the standard or high output options will be using the eTorque system (not sure if they'll still have ESS).

Personally, I'd much rather have an engine without eTorque, but unfortunately this is no longer an option if you want an automatic transmission (at least in the Rubicon trim). For me, the added complexity and expense of eventually repairing/replacing the liquid-cooled secondary battery far outweighs the benefit of smoother shifts and a little bonus torque for the first half (or quarter?) wheel turn from takeoff. At least the new 3.0TT will be adding complexity in exchange for a substantial increase in power output. The eTorque is definitely a neat idea, but imo seems kinda like a half-assed hybrid drivetrain. Again jmo, and I'm glad that most people seem to enjoy it.

 

[Gunfighter]

That's good to hear! Next milestone would be 150k.

That's the "+" part as these trucks had the 130k mileage several months ago... I am sure they are well over 150k by now. In short - the 3.6 Etorque is a proven reliable motor.

 

[Wbino]

Why do none of the Ram trucks come with a 2.0 turbo but come with a 3.6?

 

[Old Dogger]

Why do none of the Ram trucks come with a 2.0 turbo but come with a 3.6?

Same for the Gladiator.

 

[DanW]

Why do none of the Ram trucks come with a 2.0 turbo but come with a 3.6?

Probably for several reasons the 2.0 isn't as suited to towing heavier loads. But the 2.0 will easily handle anything a Wrangler can tow.

 

[AnnDee4444]

The JT platform already has trouble getting high tow ratings due to cooling on the 3.6. This is probably why they had to use the JL 2.0's cooling fans and enlarge the grill openings.

It's likely the same reason why there isn't a 392 Gladiator.

 

[Wbino]

The JT platform already has trouble getting high tow ratings due to cooling on the 3.6. This is probably why they had to use the JL 2.0's cooling fans and enlarge the grill openings.

It's likely the same reason why there isn't a 392 Gladiator.

If you get the 3.6 with the tow package on the JL you get the JT wider grill spacing.

Sponsored