Active Noise Control (Cancellation) feature comes to Jeep Wrangler JL

[Jmonroe]

I don’t live in Indiana. I live in South Carolina and my windshields are free. If I never got another windshield I’d be losing money because my Insurance is the same either way. Some states’ insurance cost more than others but that isn’t my problem if they are. I’ve never considered windshield cost and I never will. So yes, it’s free.

It might be interesting to compare premiums.

Trust me, they're not free. The cost is baked into the premiums charged in states mandating "free" replacement.

Sponsored

 

[Majestic]

It might be interesting to compare premiums.

Trust me, they're not free. The cost is baked into the premiums charged in states mandating "free" replacement.

You know well as well as I do that everybody doesn’t pay the same price for everything.
Premiums are primarily dictated by how many of your fellow citizens get into accidents, get their cars broken into or stolen, get flooded, even average age and gender, and most importantly lawsuit cost. Read for yourself...https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.fo...-highest-and-lowest-auto-insurance-rates/amp/
State to state that’s more of a question for your elected officials. But me personally I’ve swapped at least 5 windshields and my premium never went up...so it’s free for me regardless of how one wants to define “free”. One company in Florida was even offering a free box of steaks with every windshield replacement (gotta differentiate yourself somehow since price isn’t a factor).
Point is for people in states like this replacement costs shouldn’t be a consideration. The Jeep has one of the simplier windshield cost anyway.

 

[DanW]

You know well as well as I do that everybody doesn’t pay the same price for everything.
Premiums are primarily dictated by how many of your fellow citizens get into accidents, get their cars broken into or stolen, get flooded, even average age and gender, and most importantly lawsuit cost. Read for yourself...https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.fo...-highest-and-lowest-auto-insurance-rates/amp/
State to state that’s more of a question for your elected officials. But me personally I’ve swapped at least 5 windshields and my premium never went up...so it’s free for me regardless of how one wants to define “free”.
Point is for people in states like this replacement costs shouldn’t be a consideration. The Jeep has one of the simplier windshield cost anyway.

Again, that is not at all what we are saying. It isn't that big of a deal, anyway. It is very difficult to explain how the insurance industry works these complex formulas to determine premiums in different places with different drivers. It isn't worth bothering anyone over. If we were sitting at a bar, I'd buy you another round and move on to the next fun subject.

 

[misanthrope]

So...this may be my fault as I introduced the insurance aspect, but you two have kind of hijacked the thread here. Let's agree that the insurance industry are all bloodsucking leeches and get back to active noise cancellation. (Weird. I just checked the "smilies" at the top of the page, and there isn't a bloodsucking leech emoji...hunh.)

 

[DanW]

So...this may be my fault as I introduced the insurance aspect, but you two have kind of hijacked the thread here. Let's agree that the insurance industry are all bloodsucking leeches and get back to active noise cancellation. (Weird. I just checked the "smilies" at the top of the page, and there isn't a bloodsucking leech emoji...hunh.)

Lol, agreed!

 

[BMahon9]

$900 at Safe-lite and about $950 if you have them come to you. I'm still walking bow legged after replacing mine.

When safelite replaced your windshield did they replace it with a factory windshield or some off brand replacement? Does your new windshield still have the Jeep in the lower right corner?

 

[viper88]

At some point, I'll try and get a ride in a 2.0 with the Alpine and see if it seems quieter. It will be an interesting comparo. I have a hunch, though, that since the 2.0 is ultimately desired to replace the V6, they are simply doing this to get its NVH down to the levels of the Pentastar, which isn't easy for a 4 banger. I'll bet they get close, though. I'm doubtful it does much to the wind or other sources of NVH. The exhaust on the V6 is VERY quiet, as is.

I got a chance to test drive several JLs last Sat. Still am not 100% sure but the sales manager reconfirmed what the other salesman at another dealer told me about the ANC being only on the 2.0T. I drove a JL Sport S 3.6, JLR 3.6, JL Unlimited Sahara with the new 2.0 Turbo. I looked at all of the JLs with 3.6. Some had the Alpine and not a single 3.6 had ANC. The 2.0L Turbo had the Alpine and ANC. This was also confirmed on the window sticker. I also saw the microphones for the ANC. None of the 3.6L had them. My impression? Note…it was not a apples to apples comparison. The Sport S and Rubicon were both 2-doors with hard tops. I personally think the 2-door JL is quieter than the 4-door Unlimited. This is just my personal observation and opinion, no scientific proof. I think the the 3.6L in both the Sport S and Rubicon are quieter and smoother even without the ANC. I feel the NVH is better with the 3.6. The 2.0L Turbo was definitely less refined in terms of noise and perceived harshness. I think the 3.6 and 2.0T steering feels a little different too? I need to drive them again to pin point what felt different? I don't know how some reviewers could say they could not tell the difference between the 3.6 and 2.0T? They both have very different power delivery characteristics. It was very obvious to me. I could easily tell which engine I was driving by both sound and feel. I could tell blindfolded. The 2.0T was definitely louder, you could hear the turbo spooling and the waste gate releasing pressure. The 2.0T seemed a little less refined over all in terms of NHV. The plus side is the 2.0T definitely felt sportier to drive. Power delivery was not as liner as the non-turbo naturally aspirated 3.6. but more responsive. I am not saying that as a criticism. The 2.0T has much more low end torque so it feels quicker then the 3.6 off the line. Though I did not abuse the new JL I could tell the 2.0T was pretty noisy as the rpms built up. I would consider the Turbo without hesitation if the engine was quieter, smoother, and as refined as the 3.6. Unfortunately the 2.0T I drove was not. Not to say it's abad choice. The 2.0T is probably a great choice in high altitude areas like CO. I would probably put up with the less refined sound of the 2.0T for the trade off of more power at higher altitude. Cost wise the Turbo will cost more to run. Even more if you want the ANC because you will have to order the upgraded Alpine stereo for $1495. The extra $1000 for the 2.0T could buy a lot of gas. The extra couple of MPG would be offset by higher cost Premium gas. The 2.0T also has shorter service intervals. My opinion about ANC..I am not sure the ANC is masking the noise and perceived harshness enough. It would be interesting to drive the 2.0T without the ANC ON to see how noisy and rough the 2.0T really is without the it. Personally I am not sure which engine I would order yet? I want to drive ether both back to back again. I do know I would definitely order the upgraded Alpine stereo if I had to for the ANC. It's good to have choices. Unless they really do eliminate the 3.6? lol.

 

[viper88]

It seems like ANC is only on the turbo if the Jeep.com inventory vehicle details page is correct.

Turbo with Infotainment/Alpine:

• Electronic Infotainment System Group $1,495
• Uconnect® 4C NAV with 8.4-Inch Display
• GPS Navigation
• Alpine® Premium Audio System
• Auto-Dimming Rear View Mirror
• Roadside Assistance and 9-1-1 Call
• HD Radio®
• 1-Year SiriusXM® Guardian Service
• 5-Year SiriusXM® Traffic Service
• 5-Year SiriusXM® Travel Link Service
• SiriusXM® Traffic Plus
• Active Noise-Control System

V6 with Infotainment/Alpine:

• Electronic Infotainment System Group $1,495
• Uconnect® 4C NAV with 8.4-Inch Display
• GPS Navigation
• Alpine® Premium Audio System
• Auto-Dimming Rear View Mirror
• Roadside Assistance and 9-1-1 Call
• HD Radio®
• 1-Year SiriusXM® Guardian Service
• 5-Year SiriusXM® Traffic Service
• 5-Year SiriusXM® Travel Link Service
• SiriusXM® Traffic Plus
• For Details, Visit www.DriveUconnect.com

I think you might be right. I found this to be true after looking at every JL window sticker.

 

[Majestic]

I got a chance to test drive several JLs last Sat. Still am not 100% sure but the sales manager reconfirmed what the other salesman at another dealer told me about the ANC being only on the 2.0T. I drove a JL Sport S 3.6, JLR 3.6, JL Unlimited Sahara with the new 2.0 Turbo. I looked at all of the JLs with 3.6. Some had the Alpine and not a single 3.6 had ANC. The 2.0L Turbo had the Alpine and ANC. This was also confirmed on the window sticker. I also saw the microphones for the ANC. None of the 3.6L had them. My impression? Note…it was not a apples to apples comparison. The Sport S and Rubicon were both 2-doors with hard tops. I personally think the 2-door JL is quieter than the 4-door Unlimited. This is just my personal observation and opinion, no scientific proof. I think the the 3.6L in both the Sport S and Rubicon are quieter and smoother even without the ANC. I feel the NVH is better with the 3.6. The 2.0L Turbo was definitely less refined in terms of noise and perceived harshness. I think the 3.6 and 2.0T steering feels a little different too? I need to drive them again to pin point what felt different? I don't know how some reviewers could say they could not tell the 3.6 from the 2.0T? They both have very different power delivery characteristics. It was very obvious to me. I could easily tell which engine I was driving by both sound and feel. I could tell blindfolded. The 2.0T was definitely louder, you could hear the turbo spooling and the waste gate releasing pressure. The 2.0T seemed less refined over all in terms of NHV. The plus side is the 2.0T definitely felt sportier to drive. Power delivery was not as liner as the non-turbo naturally aspirated 3.6. but more responsive. I am not saying that as a criticism. The 2.0T has much more low end torque so it feels quicker then the 3.6 off the line. Though I did not abuse the new JL I could tell the 2.0T was pretty noisy as the rpms built up. I would consider the Turbo without hesitation if the engine was quieter, smoother, and as refined as the 3.6. Unfortunately the 2.0T I drove was not. Not to say it's abad choice. The 2.0T is probably a great choice in high altitude areas like CO. I would probably put up with the less refined sound of the 2.0T for the trade off of more power at higher altitude. Cost wise the Turbo will cost more to run. Even more if you want the ANC because you will have to order the upgraded Alpine stereo for $1495. The extra $1000 for the 2.0T could buy a lot of gas. The extra couple of MPG would be offset by higher cost Premium gas. The 2.0T also has shorter service intervals. My opinion about ANC..I am not sure the ANC is masking the noise and perceived harshness enough. It would be interesting to drive the 2.0T without the ANC ON to see how noisy and rough the 2.0T really is without the it. Personally I am not sure which engine I would order yet? I want to drive ether both back to back again. I do know I would definitely order the upgraded Alpine stereo if I had to for the ANC. It's good to have choices. Unless they really do eliminate the 3.6? lol.

That’s the second time I’ve heard about the overly turbo feel of an FCA 4 cyl turbo. My Mini Cooper had a turbo 4 and you could barely tell. No noise, no turbo whine, no blowoff noises, and smooth power delivery as if you just had a larger displacement engine.
A 4 cylinder is inherently a more balanced engine design than a V6. Why all the excessive NVH when FCA makes them? ANC seems more like a bandaid than an actual feature.

I can just see the engineering meeting:
“Sorry, but we tried all we could but couldn’t get the thing any quieter and we’re already late on production, so let’s just offer them the blue pill and have the sound system make them think it’s quiet.”

 

[Agent47]

It’s an Italian engine, they are known for the noises they make. Nothing wrong with some turbo whooshes and pchoos. If they sounded like Group B, that would be even better.

 

[JeepJL18]

I plan to put glass protection on my windshield. Not insurance, but the protective film.

I have it on my entire front end...its nice!

 

[viper88]

That’s the second time I’ve heard about the overly turbo feel of an FCA 4 cyl turbo. My Mini Cooper had a turbo 4 and you could barely tell. No noise, no turbo whine, no blowoff noises, and smooth power delivery as if you just had a larger displacement engine.
A 4 cylinder is inherently a more balanced engine design than a V6. Why all the excessive NVH when FCA makes them? ANC seems more like a bandaid than an actual feature.

I can just see the engineering meeting:
“Sorry, but we tried all we could but couldn’t get the thing any quieter and we’re already late on production, so let’s just offer them the blue pill and have the sound system make them think it’s quiet.”

I only drove one JL with the 2.0T. The test drive was only for 20 minutes. Don't rule out the 2.0T. Definitely test drive one back-to-back with the 3.6 to determine which you like more.

All car companies cheat a little. Overall NVH has gotten much better. Active Noise cancellation, high tech motor mounts, better balanced engines, better glass, more sound insulation, etc. all good stuff. You would be surprised at what car companies used do to combat NVH. All brands use "band aids". lol. BMW used huge 2-3 pound counter weights or harmonic balancers inside the back rest to combat NVH. It looked like a huge metal puck welded to metal strap that was attached to the seat frame to help dampen vibrations. LOL! Other cars had huge counter weights attached to exhaust pipes and drive trains. Many cars had weights attached to steering wheels.

 

[Majestic]

I only drove one JL with the 2.0T. The test drive was only for 20 minutes. Don't rule out the 2.0T. Definitely test drive one back-to-back with the 3.6 to determine which you like more.

All car companies cheat a little. Overall NVH has gotten much better. Active Noise cancellation, high tech motor mounts, better balanced engines, better glass, more sound insulation, etc. all good stuff. You would be surprised at what car companies used do to combat NVH. All brands use "band aids". lol. BMW used huge 2-3 pound counter weights or harmonic balancers inside the back rest to combat NVH. It looked like a huge metal puck welded to metal strap that was attached to the seat frame to help dampen vibrations. LOL! Other cars had huge counter weights attached to exhaust pipes and drive trains. Many cars had weights attached to steering wheels.

I ruled out 2.0L due to 91 octane alone (around here that’s close to an additional $10 per tank). It’s just disappointing that gas mileage is negligible and NVH is worse despite being a more naturally balanced engine layout. With all the noises the Jeep’s cabin is subjected to, it’s just odd that the engine noise was where they drew the line.

 

[viper88]

I ruled out 2.0L due to 91 octane alone (around here that’s close to an additional $10 per tank). It’s just disappointing that gas mileage is negligible and NVH is worse despite being a more naturally balanced engine layout. With all the noises the Jeep’s cabin is subjected to, it’s just odd that the engine noise was where they drew the line.

 

[viper88]

Definitely pros and cons for each engine choice. I personally have not decided between the 2.0T and 3.6?

2.0T upgrade can add up. It's not just gas cost if you want the 2.0T and ANC because they will have to order the upgraded Alpine to get ANC.

Both engines are good. The noticeable noise from the 2.0T is not annoying. It's just more noticeable to me because the 3.6 was that much quieter and smoother. 3.6 power delivery was much more liner, which I like. Many people might not even notice the differences with NVH. I think everyone will notice the difference in power delivery. The 2.0T makes torque lower in the power band. It's noticeable for sure. The 2.0T is definitely sportier feeling. Without a doubt the 2.0T would be a better choice at high altitude with the forced induction. On the down side, almost every turbo car I have owned was sensitive to fuel quality and exterior temps. In Chicago we have summer and winter blends of gas. Summer blends definitely makes more power. My turbo cars seem to loose a bit of power when exterior temps are hot. It's like driving a different car when temps are 90 degrees plus.

There is one more benefit of the 2.0T, a little more driving range. i am getting a 2-door which has a smaller gas tank to begin with so driving range is going to be less then a 4-door. I think the 2-door has a 17.5 gallon tank and the 4-door has a 21.5 gallon tank. I never like to run too low on gas but I will assume leaving 2.5 gallons in the tank before filling up. Assume a 2.0T will get +3mpg more.

The 2.0T 2-door would get a extra 45 miles range if filled up with 2.5 gallons left in tank.
The 2.0T 4-door would get a extra 57 mile more driving range with 2.5 gallons left in tank.

A 2.0T 2-door with the 17.5 gallon tank will cost about $7.50 more to fill with premium around here.
A 2.0T 4-door with the 21.5 gallon tank will cost about $9.50 more to fill with premium around here.

I noticed the steering felt different between the 2.0T and 3.6? Too many variables to pin point when I was driving. The 3.6 was a 2-door Rubicon. The 2.0T was a 4-door Sahara. Both had different suspension and tires. I just noticed the 3.6 has hydraulic steering assist and the 2.0 has electric steering assist.

Sponsored