How did you decide on your engine?

[Reinen]

What were the driving factors that lead to your engine choice?

I test drove both the 2.0t and 3.6 by climbing from 5000' altitude to 8000'. The 2.0t was still raring to go at the top. The 3.6 was tired and weak from the start and just got more tired on the way up. If you need to have power at altitude, it's no contest.

The only downside of the 2.0t is the sound of the engine. But the question is do you want to sound like you have power or do you want to actually have power?

Sponsored

 

[Erievon]

My JT has the 3.6, it was the only option at the time of purchase for the JT. I like it well enough. Its got decent power, very smooth, a good match to the 8 speed.

Wife's JL came with the 2.0T (No E-Torque) because she liked the color and equipment. I did scan this forum before the purchase and feedback on the 2.0T seemed to be good. It's peppier then the 3.6, but a little rough and noisy, neither my wife nor I are bothered by it, we've both had small turbo motors pass through our lives at various points.

Bottom line, didn't really "choose" either of them, but happy with both!

 

[Outrun]

I currently have the 3.6L with a 392 on order.
I got the 3.6L because that's all there was. Now that the V8 is out I finally get what I wanted. Also with the smaller engine options when you start to go big and heavy with the Jeep at a certain point you land into diminishing returns. The power from the 392 should allow for plenty of gains.

 

[Chris P]

I went w/6cylinder for the following reasons:
- Tried and true engine that's been out a while
- Less complexity without a Turbo
- I like the thought of spreading the load and wear over 6 cyl vs 4
- The ability to run unleaded vs premium (I know there is debate on this one where many run unleaded in their Turbo 4, but again this is just my decision point)
- And lastly, I've always like the jeeps with 6 or more cylinders and leaned away from 4's. Probably less objective given the new turbo-4 has just as much power, but it's stuck in my head.

That said, if when I get my 'next' wrangler, if only the Turbo-4 is offered, it won't be a deal breaker for me.....as all the positive posts I read from others on their Turbo-4 is building more confidence. Likely by the time i get another one....there may be no-where to put a gas nozzle anyway.

 

[DiscoJL]

When I went out to buy a Wrangler and saw a Willys parked out front, I had to have it.
It looked amazing in Black/White combo, I fell in love right away.
And turns out that the 3.6 Pentastar V6 in it was surprisingly great. Had decent acceleration and it sounded pretty nice for a regular V6 engine.
However, the gas mileage on it was pretty abysmal... was getting about 17 mpg even on long drives with lots of highway cruising miles. And I get about the same mileage on my Challenger Scat Pack Widebody with manual and that car I always drive more spiritedly.
Also, at the time of my Willys purchase, if I had a choice on engine, I would've gotten a turbo engine for the extra torque available from the boost.

So when 4xe was coming out with turbo 2.0 with hybrid powertrain, I knew I had to have it. And upgrading to a Rubicon was an added bonus.

 

[Chris2183]

3.6 was the only engine available when I got mine.

I like turbos so the next one will be the 2.0T.

 

[bigbaozi]

I drove a few different Wranglers before we got ours. Nothing particularly wrong with the V6, but the 2.0L ones have a lot more pep. I couldn't really tell a difference between the 2.0L with eTorque or without. It was a relatively easy choice, there were way more 2.0L's than 3.6L's on the lot at the time.

If you regularly drive at altitude, you'll be so much happier having a turbo.

 

[entropy]

proven reliability that has more than enough power to pull my JL through rocks. You know which engine I am talking about.

 

[Getmadboy]

What were the driving factors that lead to your engine choice? I've been on the fence between the 3.6 and the 2.0T. I'm leaning towards the 3.6 because of the long track record, smooth power, and the sound, sound is oddly important to me. What I don't like is the reduced fuel economy and lower power compared to the 2.0T. I've owned turbos in the past with terrible curves making the gas pedal feel like a toggle switch.

My JLUR will be on 35's and a daily driver with a very short commute to work and day trips out of town through the mountains about once a month. Next year I would like to try some 3 day overlanding trips here in the PNW. I think part of my hang up with the 2.0T is a turbo seems strange in a wrangler, but that's just me and I would get used to it, it's proven to be a good engine so far. I'm not excited about premium gas though.

For choosing an engine the most important considerations, in order, are reliability, enough power to feel confident in all driving conditions, range, fuel economy, and maintenance cost.

It sounds like the 4xe might be a perfect match for you. It excels in short commutes to fully utilize the electric driving and is priced comparable to the other engine options (after tax credit). It has more than enough power and is one of the better “fuel” economical versions of the wrangler given your primary use for it. I love my 4xe for these reasons, but to each his own.

 

[Getmadboy]

I absolutely love how the blue rubicon hood logo pops against the granite color. That is all. Cheers to a good looking 4xe!

 

[DOOKEY]

It was early 2018. What choices?

 

[Creeker]

Simple equation:

Manual Transmission = 3.6 Liter Engine.

 

[Reinen]

For laughs, I did a quick rudimentary calculation.
The 2.0t will have more HP than the 392 at over 25,000' altitude. But unless you bolt on a propeller and wings, there are only 41 places on earth where that happens and if you get there in a Jeep, I'd be seriously impressed.

 

[grimmjeeper]

For me:

1. Performance at altitude. Turbo needed over the passes.
2. Low end torque. I rock crawl and that is low and slow driving.
3. Power always available on long range drives. I don't want to rely on a battery that can give up halfway up the pass.
4. Fuel economy. Nice to have if it's available.

Only one engine meets all of that. The 3.0 diesel.

 

[JJMalone]

The specific loading on bearings, piston thrust faces, cam journals, etc are much less on 3.6 v6 then a 2.0 i4 with the same torque and power. Turbo makes exhaust valves run hotter and is probably the most vulnerable part with any oiling problem. I don't think the turbo will go 100K (not the engine, the turbo itself). No way I would believe the 2.0 will match the 3.6 on long term high mileage reliability. My opinions are based on 62 years of car ownership of about 50 cars including a few with positive intake system pressure, corvette z06's, mustangs, many 4x4s etc.

Sponsored