Anyone have 2.0 Turbo regret?

[tkoob]

love reading this thread!
you know they call it progress, they will eventually force us down some road that we don't want to go but they will debug the issues as experience is gained.

just as engines got reliable and ran troublefree (Fuel injection and other improvements) , the fuel conservations kicked in and added complexity of Turbo and eTorque and God knows what else.

I am not going to complain and going to enjoy the experience it's a good carl, nimble great design and fun to drive.

Sponsored

 

[Wkaz]

Lovin my 2021 turbo, time will tell. Ya, gas is more expensive but you can't take it with you anyways. . so far worst tank around town was 19.7 on 87, pretty consistent 21/22 with 93. Hy-way pushing 24mpg. Fun like a VW!

 

[DadJokes]

I just took a trip and got the worst displayed mileage I ever have, around 18 mpg. The only change since I last got 25-26 hwy was installing a 3/4” spacer up front so it’s currently sitting level until I do the same in the rear when the weather cooperates. I was running a low 29 psi tire pressure hwy along with gusts of wind I fought for the better part of 8 hours in 0-25° temperatures so maybe it was a trifecta of mpg hurting circumstances.

Other than that, my 31k mile 2.0T has been a flawless experience so far. Just oil, oil filters, air filters, and tire rotations.

 

[18JLRubi]

I see a difference (slight) in using 91 non-ethanol premium but honestly, it runs well on 87, too. It’s tough to find anything higher than 91 but you don’t need it. My dirt bikes, that’s another story!

I think the difference you are seeing is the non ethanol part... I see no difference in 93 to 87 with the normal 10% ish ethanol. I'm also at 28k. I've run 93 once since about 10k miles.. just to make sure nothing has changed with the break-in and greater mileage.... on another note.. did you notice a big increase in economy after 20k ish ???

 

[Black Jeep Convertible]

Just buy a used one with over 20k miles of rental miles. If it can survive the abuse of hundreds of random drivers, then it’ll probably be fine for the rest of your ownership. That’s what I did with mine. 27k rental miles but not a single scratch underneath so no rock crawling

 

[SleepEatJeepRepeat]

So 17k Mike’s and suddenly on a road trip getting 21 miles to the gallon with 35” ridge grapplers .. after a year and a half of 16 mph on road trips.. strange

 

[Grooster]

I think the difference you are seeing is the non ethanol part... I see no difference in 93 to 87 with the normal 10% ish ethanol. I'm also at 28k. I've run 93 once since about 10k miles.. just to make sure nothing has changed with the break-in and greater mileage.... on another note.. did you notice a big increase in economy after 20k ish ???

I did. I am steady at a 23 mpg average. I’m running premium year round but know I don’t have to. I will run non-ethanol premium when I can but it isn’t found on my side of town yet. Pre-20K mileage was 18-20. I noticed the exhaust note is maturing, too. Best heard with the radio playing at talk over levels. Nice balance. Hard to keep my foot out of this thing, though - so much fun!

 

[Heimkehr]

Anyone have 2.0 Turbo regret?

No. I continue to have 2.0 Turbo validation.

I like the GME T4 Hurricane every time I drive the vehicle. Easygoing when I want it, plenty of hustle when I need it. 26 MPG using 91 or better. No E-Torque nonsense, either.

Wanting to give the minivan engine a fair chance, I test drove three separate Wranglers with the 3.6L V6. I walked away unimpressed, but not uninformed.

 

[MLS_AZ]

Anyone have 2.0 Turbo regret?

No E-Torque nonsense, either.

What do you mean by this? Just curious.

 

[oceanblue2019]

What do you mean by this? Just curious.

Someone who is afraid of the 48V battery and added complexity, but not afraid of Turbo chargers.

For what it's worth I've had no issues doing some very difficult black/red trails with a 2.0L e-Torque.

Nothing between what I own and the 392 excites me, and being able to get ~19mpg on cross country trips is hard to give up.

 

[18JLRubi]

Someone who is afraid of the 48V battery and added complexity, but not afraid of Turbo chargers.

For what it's worth I've had no issues doing some very difficult black/red trails with a 2.0L e-Torque.

Nothing between what I own and the 392 excites me, and being able to get ~19mpg on cross country trips is hard to give up.

I lost all charging on Ophir pass and had to limp to Silverton, where the problem fixed itself... I have to believe it was caused by the etorque crawling at low speeds .... other than that one issue. Not a problem... my wife's 6cyl jlr gets just as good overall mileage.... which is suprising.... slightly better mileage at interstate speeds...

 

[Heimkehr]

What do you mean by this? Just curious.

Unnecessary complexity, in my estimation, even when it functions without issue. The turbocharged four cylinder acquits itself very well without the E-Torque hardware in situ.

Further, as the post preceding this one (and others like it) makes plain, owners have experienced a few issues that may be or have been walked back to the system's battery, etc.

E.g., the problem most frequently documented on this forum is inverter overheating after long periods of operation in 4 Low. This is a real Achilles heel, with respect to the Wrangler's mission brief.

 

[AnnDee4444]

No regret here. I bought the 2-door with the most torque. The 3.6 literally needs a supercharger to match the 2.0s peak torque.

 

[KenPewPew]

I don't know all the technical stuff cause I am a noob when it comes to automobile - but I love love LOVE!!!!! my 2.0 Turbo engine that came with my 2021 2dr Rubicon. Before that I have Pentastar 3.6 on my 2019 2dr and Turbo engine win hands down. When I was using Pentastar, I feel like I have to step on the gas more often to maintain speed and to go faster - but I notice that Turbo engine is way smoother (except for the whirring noise sometimes which once you get used to it - its negligible), it is so much smoother to go downhill and I don't have to step on the gas so much to speed up or go uphill (sorry noob jargon here). But what I love most is how awesome it is when it accelerate - this engine allows me to zoom off after stopping (haha bye bye Prius - wait nevermind - anything is faster than Prius). People in the forum asked me to use premium 93 fuel and that really complements the turbo engine - it makes a different when it comes to acceleration.

I am so happy with my Turbo 2.0 engine and it makes my love my Jeep even more. I did not know that there are such differences when it comes to the engine.

 

[MLS_AZ]

Unnecessary complexity, in my estimation, even when it functions without issue. The turbocharged four cylinder acquits itself very well without the E-Torque hardware in situ.

Further, as the post preceding this one (and others like it) makes plain, owners have experienced a few issues that may be or have been walked back to the system's battery, etc.

E.g., the problem most frequently documented on this forum is inverter overheating after long periods of operation in 4 Low. This is a real Achilles heel, with respect to the Wrangler's mission brief.

OK, got it.

I wondered whether or not it was wise to get the e-Torque feature or wait until 2021 and get the I4 without. I assume your Wrangler does NOT have e-Torque.

So far, it has been OK both on- and off-road. We will see. But I definitely love the performance! I'm just glad they have the multi-year warranty to cover the battery and components.

Thanks for the reply!

Sponsored