EPA ratings 2020 3.6 BSG - disappointed

8flat

Well-Known Member
First Name
Gary
Joined
Feb 5, 2019
Messages
260
Reaction score
187
Location
Montana
Vehicle(s)
2019 JLUR
This makes the existence of the bsg baffling. Just why add all the cost and complexity for... nothing.

I’m curious if the 2.0 without the BSG gets the same as the current 2.0. If so again why would you add the cost and complexity of the bsg.

Diesel and PHEV remain vaporware.
Eerily familiar to the Ford ecoboost saga. Real world mileage is no better than a 5.0 in their F150s, literally almost exactly the same when logging long-term averages, but you pay $1,800 for the engine option and also have way more things to go wrong. (We've owned both, and had turbo issues with the ecoboost). Do people not use calcultors?

It's why I decided to skip the 2.0 in our JL. KISS applies here.
 

viper88

Well-Known Member
First Name
Nick
Joined
Apr 22, 2018
Messages
3,213
Reaction score
2,970
Location
IL
Vehicle(s)
'19 JLR 2.0T
It's a brick:like:...
My JL gets a much better mpg than my TJ every did.
Every generation seems to get better mpg and more power. My '97 TJ had the 2.5 4-banger and 3-speed automatic. Was total dog and averaged 14-15 mpg no matter what. My '15 3.6 automatic Freedom Edition averaged 17-18 mpg combined. My '19 Rubicon with the 2.0T averages around 19-20 mpg combined with A/C blasting. I have seen around 24-25 mpg all highway. Also the 2.0T is damn rocket compared to the 2.5 or 3.6. A lot has to do with the new 8-speed auto. Great match with the 2.0T.
 

pablo_max3045

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 2, 2019
Messages
582
Reaction score
533
Location
Germany (ex-pat)
Vehicle(s)
2019 Rubicon
Occupation
Engineering project manager
Looking at the fueleconomy.gov site to see how the 3.6 BSG did in the JL, and saw interesting comparison...

For the unlimited ...
2020 3.6 BSG 20 combined, 19 City 22 Hwy
2020 3.6 ess 20 combined, 18 city, 22 hwy
2019 3.6 ess 20 combined, 18 city, 23 hwy
2019 2.0 BSG 22 combined, 22 city, 24 hwy

Disappointed in the 3.6 BSG... was hopeful it would have been closer to the 2.0, or at least better than the 3.6 ess. Also not sure why the hwy number went down by 1 mpg from 2019 to 2020.

Rethinking a bit my choice of 3.6 in my 2020 JLUS... but I already have a 2.0 direct inject turbo in another car that had some issues, and wanted the ‘simplicity’ of the Pentastar. Was just hoping the etorque version was going to post better mpg numbers.

-Spaghettipie
It's not that bad.
I get usually between 25-27 MPG mixed with the diesel, but I only have 2800 km on it, so I expect that will improve.
I normally drive conservatively though.
 

four low

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 1, 2017
Messages
2,087
Reaction score
2,195
Location
central New York
Vehicle(s)
2018 JL
The BSG doesn't do anything for highway mileage. It cranks the engine and provides a split second of additional torque at very low RPMs as you're starting from a dead stop. It never was intended to be a full hybrid, but as a much improved start stop system over the 12V ESS. The fact that the city mileage had a full MPG improvement over the standard ESS says something about how well the BSG works.
Exact!y. The "Mild " part of "hybrid"...
 

Dalingrin

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 19, 2019
Messages
119
Reaction score
71
Location
Arkansas
Vehicle(s)
.
Eerily familiar to the Ford ecoboost saga. Real world mileage is no better than a 5.0 in their F150s, literally almost exactly the same when logging long-term averages, but you pay $1,800 for the engine option and also have way more things to go wrong. (We've owned both, and had turbo issues with the ecoboost). Do people not use calcultors?

It's why I decided to skip the 2.0 in our JL. KISS applies here.
TBH, the Ecoboost has been one of my favorite engines. It is a fantastic gas engine for a truck because it has ample torque even in the low rev range similar to a diesel. When buying my F-150 I test drove both the V8 and the V6 Ecoboost. Ecoboost was much more fun to drive(particularly in Sport mode), had more usable torque for towing AND had *slightly* better gas mileage. That was worth $1800 to me. It's not like MPG is the only reason to get the Ecoboost.

Anecdotes are pretty worthless but between family members and friends I know of several 2015+ F-150s with the Ecoboost and so far none have had issues.
 

bumpit

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 30, 2018
Messages
266
Reaction score
356
Location
Missouri
Vehicle(s)
2015 Grand Cherokee 2019 JL Rubicon
Every generation seems to get better mpg and more power. My '97 TJ had the 2.5 4-banger and 3-speed automatic. Was total dog and averaged 14-15 mpg no matter what. My '15 3.6 automatic Freedom Edition averaged 17-18 mpg combined. My '19 Rubicon with the 2.0T averages around 19-20 mpg combined with A/C blasting. I have seen around 24-25 mpg all highway. Also the 2.0T is damn rocket compared to the 2.5 or 3.6. A lot has to do with the new 8-speed auto. Great match with the 2.0T.
I'm not sure if rocket is what I would call the 2.0t. I'd agree its def a big difference vs the 2.5 but vs the new 3.6 I'd hardly call it rocket faster lol.

I wanted to like the 2.0t but low range and from a stop felt like I was driving my 4cyl yj until the boost kicked in. It would scoot once it got boost but it was a easy pass for me.
 

Arterius2

Well-Known Member
First Name
Jerry
Joined
Dec 29, 2018
Messages
3,194
Reaction score
3,917
Location
Vancouver, BC
Vehicle(s)
2018 JLU Sahara 2.0L
I'm not sure if rocket is what I would call the 2.0t. I'd agree its def a big difference vs the 2.5 but vs the new 3.6 I'd hardly call it rocket faster lol.

I wanted to like the 2.0t but low range and from a stop felt like I was driving my 4cyl yj until the boost kicked in. It would scoot once it got boost but it was a easy pass for me.
The 2.0 was designed to excel in low range torque(with bsg active), so not sure why you felt that way, perhaps it was the 4.10 gearing in the rubicon vs 3.45 on the non-rubi 2.0 that made the difference?
 

bumpit

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 30, 2018
Messages
266
Reaction score
356
Location
Missouri
Vehicle(s)
2015 Grand Cherokee 2019 JL Rubicon
The 2.0 was designed to excel in low range torque(with bsg active), so not sure why you felt that way, perhaps it was the 4.10 gearing in the rubicon vs 3.45 on the non-rubi 2.0 that made the difference?
Both rubicons with 4.10 gears. After driving the 2.0 I looked up some dyno charts and confirmed what my ass felt. The torque curve is sudden and less smooth in the 2.0t.

Let's be honest tho with either of these engines the real star of the show is that 8 speed zf trans.
 

OnlyOne

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2018
Messages
1,533
Reaction score
2,705
Location
Eagle, Colorado
Vehicle(s)
2020 F150 3.5 /2019 Mustang GT PP1 A10 whipped
I'm not sure if rocket is what I would call the 2.0t. I'd agree its def a big difference vs the 2.5 but vs the new 3.6 I'd hardly call it rocket faster lol.

I wanted to like the 2.0t but low range and from a stop felt like I was driving my 4cyl yj until the boost kicked in. It would scoot once it got boost but it was a easy pass for me.
That’s because you’re in Missouri. Lol. Up here the turbo is a rocket compared to the V6. I’ve had both. If I was in the flatlands, it might have been a bit harder to choose....but not at 7k ft. No brainer.
 

bumpit

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 30, 2018
Messages
266
Reaction score
356
Location
Missouri
Vehicle(s)
2015 Grand Cherokee 2019 JL Rubicon
That’s because you’re in Missouri. Lol. Up here the turbo is a rocket compared to the V6. I’ve had both. If I was in the flatlands, it might have been a bit harder to choose....but not at 7k ft. No brainer.
I didnt even consider my challenger a rocket with 400hp/tq. I might have liked it more at altitude but I've had no complaints with either of the other 3.6l at altitude when we visit your beautiful state.

Lots of people love it and I'm not trying to hate on it I just didnt prefer it.
 

DocTwinkie

Well-Known Member
First Name
George
Joined
Aug 19, 2018
Messages
479
Reaction score
553
Location
Ohio
Vehicle(s)
2020 JLUR 3.6m, 2019 Acura RDX Adv.
Occupation
Doc... Duh.
I just realized that if/when the mythical diesel and PHEV come out the wrangler will have a whopping 7 possible engine transmission combos.
3.6 manual
3.6 bsg auto
3.6 auto
2.0 bsg auto
2.0 auto
Diesel auto
3.6 PHEV auto.

That’s completely insane. The 2.0 seems to get better gas mileage and torque. The bsg in the 3.6 does zero for mileage so assuming it does equally nothing for the 2.0 then I’d argue the bsg should be scrapped. The 3.6 Id also argue should be scrapped as the 2.0 has better torque and mileage. The only argument to keep the 3.6 is that it’s more reliable which...fair enough I suppose.

That would drop engines to
2.0 auto
2.0 manual (why this isn’t offered manual is beyond me).

Then add in the diesel (manual would be nice). 3 engines. Focus on making them reliable.

The PHEV is a cool idea but very expensive to fix. Very complicated. Does anyone trust fca to make something that complex reliable? And let’s face it. Sad as it is to say not a lot of wrangler buyers care about gas mileage. That PHEV breaks out of warranty as is apt to happen with an fca product you are so screwed. Go full electric with 4 motors a la Rivian and you’ll have a much simpler mechanical system, better torque, and better handling.
 

Kluk Ztopolovky

Well-Known Member
First Name
Kluk
Joined
Jul 12, 2019
Messages
946
Reaction score
833
Location
Toronto
Vehicle(s)
Wrangler JL Sport 2dr Sting Gray manual
2018 JLU 3.6 auto, mostly on Toronto city roads 20-30km per day round trip, 13 mpg, I'm tend to gun it most of the time. On a trip to Ithaca, NY I think I saw 20mpg
IMG_20190729_130039.jpg
I am sure if you "gun it" then there is more thirst from the busy pistons . Living in Canada do you set your Jeep to miles? I know many older Canadians of course measure distance and mileage by miles . I honestly think it was a mistake to convert Canada to the metric system considering the largest trading partner and a giant of a neighbor has been running all business in the US measurement system. I just find it little confusing in Canada how we go about the business of measurements.I think Canada is probably the only country in the entire world where new cars will have available settings in both miles and km on the tachometer . Yet we still buy "2 by 4 " lumber , in construction its still mostly feet and inches , in supermarkets it's still pounds etc. Well , that was a national gift of the old Trudeau guy and even now we still have to deal with the Trudeaus .
 

Advertisement




Clayton Offroad
 



Advertisement
Top