And i was just asking about the 2.0 vs 3.6.

mjaga

Well-Known Member
First Name
Mike
Joined
Apr 23, 2020
Messages
416
Reaction score
470
Location
Illinois
Vehicle(s)
2021 JLUR Sting Grey
I couldn't be happier with my 2.0. I wouldn't worry about the recall - only affected what, 3 months of production? And it's no longer an issue? I wouldn't stress - enjoy all the extra pep, torque and MPG's!
 

PocketsEmptied

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 5, 2021
Messages
339
Reaction score
638
Location
NC
Vehicle(s)
'08 JKUR, '21 JLUR
Unless you bought one manufactured between January 24th, 2020 and March 18th, 2020 it wouldn't apply to yours. There can be recalls on anything anywhere, nothing to base an engine buying decision on unless there were multiple recalls trying to fix the same issue and still some questions whether they did or not. This would not fall into that category.
 

omega145

Well-Known Member
First Name
Eric
Joined
May 9, 2019
Messages
146
Reaction score
324
Location
NH
Vehicle(s)
2020 Rubicon Recon
Occupation
Engineer
Seems silly to worry about choosing the 2.0 over a recall that impacted a small subset of their motors. You know there have been Pentastar 3.6 motor recalls in the past right?

Drive both and make the choice based on what you enjoy more. I was set on a 3.6 and found a good deal on a 2.0T that I couldn't pass up. All of my previous complaints are gone as I've gotten used to any of the quirks of the motor and find the turbo to be a fun little motor to drive.
Pros: Better gas mileage, pretty cool to get 19+MPG city and 22+MPG highway on a Rubicon with 33's and that's driving normally.
Punch it and go, turbo makes hitting the accelerator a little more fun

Cons: Sounds (doesn't sound as good and makes more strange noises, almost like a turbo diesel)
slight turbo lag

I do wonder if there will be future reliability issues but that's what the warranty is for and there's more reliable vehicles and motors out there than the 3.6 V6. Test drive both like I did and see what's the deal breaker for you.
 

Chrismeece74

Member
First Name
Chris
Joined
Aug 31, 2021
Messages
10
Reaction score
41
Location
New Port Richey, FL
Vehicle(s)
2021 Wrangler Freedom Unlimited
My wife has a 4 Dr wrangler with the 2.0, no issues with it at all. She loves it.
 

Speed331

Well-Known Member
First Name
Sean
Joined
Jun 19, 2020
Messages
147
Reaction score
479
Location
Las Vegas, NV
Vehicle(s)
2008 Jetta, 2018 Discovery Sport, 2020 Wrangler Sport S (on order)
The 2.0 is a great engine.
Went on a road trip over the weekend and averaged just under 26 mpg for over 800 miles - about 100 of that in the dirt.
Pic is from halfway through the trip...
20210904_130452.jpg

The mpg went even higher on the return home - mostly downhill from Flagstaff - actually saw 27.5 at one point...
GH021280_1630794641874.jpg
 

displayname

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2020
Messages
384
Reaction score
484
Location
DFW
Vehicle(s)
TBD
"The plastic fuel supply line connector that attaches to the high-pressure fuel pump may crack prematurely"

Prematurely? Like there's a mature time for it to crack and spray fuel everywhere? Mine is outside that build window so not worried for now.
For most manufacturers, any time immediately after warranty periods is end is just fine for failure of parts:CWL:
 

Gunfighter

Well-Known Member
First Name
P.J.
Joined
Oct 7, 2020
Messages
153
Reaction score
231
Location
West Michigan
Vehicle(s)
2021 Jeep Wrangler High Altitude
Occupation
PCD tooling manufacturing & sales
Vehicle Showcase
1
3.6 all the way. Have driven both. The 2.0 is zippier a bit, but the engine itself doesn't have the best sound and the powerband delivery takes some getting used to. I like the smooth linear power deliver the 3.6 provides. To each their own.
 

jjvincent

Well-Known Member
First Name
John
Joined
May 31, 2021
Messages
111
Reaction score
248
Location
Bethlehem, PA
Vehicle(s)
2021 Wrangler, 2017 VW Alltrack, 2003 VW Eurovan
Occupation
Mechanical Engineer
If you are worried, then get the V6. Makes more sense as it's been around for a long time and boatloads of Minivans have it along with Pickups and whatever else they shove it into. I'd think by now they have to be making it right. I have a 2.0 but I work on cars and have driven plenty of V6 Jeeps. In the end, I am not picky. Both do the job.
 

CincyJLRubi

Member
Joined
Jul 12, 2021
Messages
10
Reaction score
9
Location
Cincinnati, Ohio
Vehicle(s)
2021 Jeep Wrangler Unlimited Rubicon
If you ever plan on driving at altitude like in Colorado and other mountain states the 2.0 turbo is the far better choice. A NA 3.6 will fall further on its face with every 1000 feet of altitude.
 

JimLee

Well-Known Member
First Name
Jim
Joined
Mar 29, 2019
Messages
3,445
Reaction score
16,264
Location
Too damn close to Death Valley
Vehicle(s)
'19 JLU
If you ever plan on driving at altitude like in Colorado and other mountain states the 2.0 turbo is the far better choice. A NA 3.6 will fall further on its face with every 1000 feet of altitude.
giphy (9).gif


I drive my 3.6 over 12,000 feet quite often, there is no noticeable loss of power. Have I dyno'd it there, no, but I haven't hit a situation where it struggled or failed to do what it always does.
 

CincyJLRubi

Member
Joined
Jul 12, 2021
Messages
10
Reaction score
9
Location
Cincinnati, Ohio
Vehicle(s)
2021 Jeep Wrangler Unlimited Rubicon
giphy (9).gif


I drive my 3.6 over 12,000 feet quite often, there is no noticeable loss of power. Have I dyno'd it there, no, but I haven't hit a situation where it struggled or failed to do what it always does.


Sorry I think I was misunderstood. I didn’t mean to suggest the 3.6 won’t be capable at altitude. Every motor suffers but in my experience a NA suffers a lot more than a turbo. So I can live with the sound of the 4 banger knowing I won’t lose as much HP at elevation. that’s the one thing that led me to the turbo.
 

JimLee

Well-Known Member
First Name
Jim
Joined
Mar 29, 2019
Messages
3,445
Reaction score
16,264
Location
Too damn close to Death Valley
Vehicle(s)
'19 JLU
Sorry I think I was misunderstood. I didn’t mean to suggest the 3.6 won’t be capable at altitude. Every motor suffers but in my experience a NA suffers a lot more than a turbo. So I can live with the sound of the 4 banger knowing I won’t lose as much HP at elevation. that’s the one thing that led me to the turbo.
I can live with that, I do know that a turbo will handle altitudes better than a NA engine, I just haven't felt the difference in my travels. I don't have anything bad to say about the 2.0 myself, I chose the 3.6 simply because it has been around for awhile and proven to be a good motor, that was back in '19 though. Don't take offense at my post, that's just me.
 
Advertisement

Rock Krawler
 
Advertisement
Top