Dependabilty of E-Torque

[dragoneggs]

I totally understand that there’s a lot of pro E torque people out in the world because that’s all you can get right now. But that doesn’t change the facts and physics and reality of the two systems. One of the big pluses of the 392 is no E torque or ESS. It’s mentioned in every other post. The most expensive Jeep has the least amount of complicated emissions. Imagine that.

'Complicated' emissions are a result of quotas and needing to meet MPG requirements as company. If the 392 was built in larger numbers, you would probably see extra equipment on them as well to help them make their numbers.

Sponsored

 

[Xcoaste]

I have a 2.0 etorque and a tuner. Don't know about the 3.6

Sorry, I should have specified for the 3.6.

 

[tk1700]

Myself and 2 of my best friends we all have the 3.6 motor. I have e torque and they do not. One drives a Rubicon Gladiator and the other a Rubicon Wrangler. I 100% notice a difference in acceleration and smoothness off/on the throttle. It's different. As far as torque goes, I notice a power difference in the pedal in 4lo when crawling, I felt more umpfff from the get go. Normal cruising speeds/driving I couldn't tell. That's an honest review from me, could it be subjective and in my head, sure but both my friends said a similar thing when they drove my Jeep.

I doubt you feel any difference in the pedal in 4 lo from e torque. E torque only engages the MGU for the first 1/8 to 1/4 revolution of the tires when starting from a full stop. Once the tires have started turning and the ICE has started it is all ICE.

I have a 2019 3.6 and a 2021 2.0, both non e torque. I researched and test drove non and e torque Jeeps before purchasing. The extra complexity of the e torque system, weight/cost of the battery, location of the battery and MGU instead of alternator convinced me to go non e torque. I didn't notice a difference driving either version.

I don't regret my choices and haven't had any problems with the batteries. The 2019 is 3.5 years old with 35k miles and the 2021 is 2 years old with 25k miles. To each their own, and enjoy what you have!

 

[Tncdrew]

If the 392 was built in larger numbers, you would probably see extra equipment on them as well to help them make their numbers.

Yes! Like the ANNOYING MDS (cylinder deactivation) system that I had to defeat EVERY time I got behind the wheel of my 2016 Ram 1500 5.7 Hemi.
Man I hated that crap. If I had wanted a 4-cyl truck, I'd have bought a 4-cyl truck!

I guess I could've bought a Tazer like device to defeat it.... dunno.

 

[Zandcwhite]

There are aftermarket options closer to $600, not to mention low mile used options from the shops specializing in v8 swaps in the $400-600 range. It’s comical that those afraid of the etorque quote dealer pricing on the etorque battery and 1/3 their cost on the aux battery. If you were replacing that battery 3 times as often at the $200 dealer price, now the numbers aren’t so far apart. Add in the extra labor for the 3x swaps, even if I do the work my time is very valuable to me. Just look for aux battery failures on this forum vs etorque failures. Clearly the etorque is the reliable option at this point. Most people aren’t keeping their new vehicles beyond the 8yr/80k mile warranty on the etorque components anyway.

 

[Headbarcode]

I have the 3.6 etorque and test drove a non etorque as well. The auto stop/start is so smooth and seemless on the etorque compared to the other motor. I’m constantly reading about people complaining about and having problems with their normal ESS motors with the little motorcycle battery and can’t actually find any posts about a specific etorque problem.
I don’t think fuel economy really differs between the two but I did notice smoother shifting on the etorque version. Also if you shut the auto stop start off then you’re not going to notice a difference in off the line speed between the two motors. But if you’re starting from a stop with the engine off there is a huge difference. The regular one will use the starter to start and the take off as normal. The etorque instantly and silently starts and then genuinely torques like a son of a bitch off the line. No issues at all spinning my 37’s with stock gearing.
You also get a 8 year warranty on the 48 volt battery and other etorque components so I wouldn’t worry about issues that may or may not pop up.

Disabling the auto stop start on an eTorque equipped engine does not disable any other etorque benefits.

 

[Dailydrivenwrangler]

Disabling the auto stop start on an eTorque equipped engine does not disable any other etorque benefits.

It doesn’t disable the smother transition between shifts or the regenerative braking but it defeats the biggest and most noticeable function and that is the super smooth restart of the motor after a stop as well as the added torque on launch immediately after an engine restart.

 

[Zandcwhite]

It doesn’t disable the smother transition between shifts or the regenerative braking but it defeats the biggest and most noticeable function and that is the super smooth restart of the motor after a stop as well as the added torque on launch immediately after an engine restart.

It still adds the torque from a stop wether the engine was just smoothly restarted or not. The only thing turning off the ess does is replace the smooth restart with an idling engine period. If you drive in a city and spend a lot of time idling at traffic lights the ess may have the engine off long enough to realize a tiny amount of fuel savings. For the rest of us that might be stopped for a few seconds at a time at a stop sign the engine won’t be off long enough to save any fuel at all. There have been multiple people using fuelly for months to see if there’s any difference with ess on vs off in fuel consumption and I’ve yet to see even one show any savings. I’d say the added torque at take off is the biggest benefit of the etorque system as ESS has yet to be proven beneficial at all.

 

[Bobby Morehead]

I have a 21 Rubi Xr with the 3.6 etorque and I'm happy with it. My Dad has the 3.6 without it. Mine seems quicker off the line and has a little better acceleration but that could be due to the 4.56 gears in my xr vs his 4.11 in his non xr. I average the same 18 mpg in my XR with 35's as he does in his with 33's

 

[Yzfguy]

The last thing my dealer told me while we were doing my online order was "oh it looks like you have to get the etorque if you want an automatic."
I had never even heard of it.
I walked out and said I needed to do some research before I signed on the dotted line. Went home watched a bunch of videos did a lot of reading and ended up purchasing it, not having driven one.
4 months later when I picked up my Jeep I couldn't believe how nice it drives and I actually leave the start to stop feature turned on full-time and enjoy the peppy feel of this motor that I never expected to have. No regrets here.
I don't see why people take this stuff personally. They have different configurations so we can all get what we choose.. live and let live?

 

[five9dak]

Too early to tell, give all that technology plus extra cooling systems 5+ years in the rust belt then we can look back and assess its longevity. People with brand new ones that live in the sunshine states are going to tell you they’re awesome. Don’t forget about the expensive 48 V battery that will need to be replaced someday. You get no mileage benefit. It’s only about emissions. The E torque system adds much complexity with two additional cooling systems a generator and an expensive 48V battery. All proprietary to FCA.

Yep, these are compliance systems, plain and simple. More complication reduces reliability.

The AUX battery ESS system is also for compliance, and also reduces reliability compared to a conventional ICE implementation.

The ESS can be disabled and the AUX can be removed and bypassed. Long term that would be the most reliable path.

 

[21 Willys]

Have there been alot of problems with E-Torque? What happens if it quits working? It replaces the alternator so does everything shut down like when an alternator goes bad (I know it would goto battery power then)? They took it off the 2.0 and added to 3.6l. Has anyone driven the 3.6 with E-Torque and one without? Can you tell the difference?

i have a 2021 JL 3.6 etorque with auto and I get about 22 mpg. Previously had 2013 JK 3.6 with manual and I got about 21 mpg. The 3.6 with etorque has so much more pep (even passing power) than the 2013 3.6. I still have a hard time believing it is the same engine. There is no comparison on the power difference. I know the engine has been updated, but the power difference is unreal. I am very pleased with the 3.6 with etorque.

 

[Gaffer]

They should use the system that is on the Ram. No plug in. It does passive regen to charge. Why bother with plug in when it will only go 25 miles on a charge?

 

[Yzfguy]

I think you're confusing e torque with the normal hybrid. The e torque doesn't plug in.

 

[aldo98229]

i have a 2021 JL 3.6 with etorque with auto and I get about 22 mpgs. Previously had 2013 JK 3.6 with manual and I got about 21 mpgs. The 3.6 with etorque has so much more pep (even passing power) than the 2013 3.6. I still have a hard time believing it is the same engine. There is no comparison on the power difference. I know the engine has been updated, but the power difference is unreal. I am very pleased with the 3.6 with etorque.

eTorque only works on the first half-a-wheel turn from a standing stop.

The added power you feel when passing is likely due to the new 8-speed automatic in combination with a much smoother Pentastar engine.

Another different could be if you went from a JK with 3.21 gearing to a JL with 3.73 or 4.10.

Sponsored