How is long term reliability of the 2.0L Turbo?

[Jehovasfitness]

I was turned off by the non-fold flat seats, but all things considered (esp the pricing) I'm leaning towards trading in our 2018 JLUR with the 3.6L for the 4xe JLUR.

Having never owned a turbo engined car before, how is the long term reliability of the 2.0L turbo? Seems like an added complexity that could go wrong, then again so could the 4xe battery/motor but at least that comes with a longer warranty.

Sponsored

 

[robynE]

I can't attest to long term reliability but I have a 2018 JLU with the turbo engine and I absolutly love it. I haven't had any problems with it so far. I tow a 3000lb with it to and I don't even feel trailer back there. The SECOND I realized the 4xe had all that additional power I placed an order. I'm thrilled that the already impressingly quick engine is getting a nice upgrade!

 

[Bigfx1]

Having driven a lot of turbo powered cars from inline 6 turbos to a lot of import 4 cylinder turbos, the longevity isn’t really there. You should be able to get 100k out of it but I have seen a lot of turbo engines go down sooner (60k+) after that things get a little more dicey, depending on usage and cooling, a lot of turbo life depends on cooling and maintenance, boost leaks from worn hoses or poor fuel usage can really impact the life of a turbo vehicle. Plus these manufacturers don’t really manufacture the engines to stand up to the added heat and pressures of a turbo application they skip forging key components etc.

 

[Windshieldfarmer]

Having driven a lot of turbo powered cars from inline 6 turbos to a lot of import 4 cylinder turbos, the longevity isn’t really there. You should be able to get 100k out of it but I have seen a lot of turbo engines go down sooner (60k+) after that things get a little more dicey, depending on usage and cooling, a lot of turbo life depends on cooling and maintenance, boost leaks from worn hoses or poor fuel usage can really impact the life of a turbo vehicle. Plus these manufacturers don’t really manufacture the engines to stand up to the added heat and pressures of a turbo application they skip forging key components etc.

If you look at these threads the 3.6 has had more problems than the 2.0. My experience with the 3.6 in the JK was less than positive. Both my son in law and his brother had multiple valve and head issues on their 2012 and 2015 Wranglers. Early long term reports on the 2.0 are positive with very little evidence of widespread issues. In the 80s I managed a small fleet of Dodge cars with the 2.4L turbo. We consistently got 160,000 miles before the bodies would rot out. Never a major engine issue. I would think in 35 years the engineering may have improved a bit.....time will tell.

 

[Bigfx1]

If you look at these threads the 3.6 has had more problems than the 2.0. My experience with the 3.6 in the JK was less than positive. Both my son in law and his brother had multiple valve and head issues on their 2012 and 2015 Wranglers. Early long term reports on the 2.0 are positive with very little evidence of widespread issues. In the 80s I managed a small fleet of Dodge cars with the 2.4L turbo. We consistently got 160,000 miles before the bodies would rot out. Never a major engine issue. I would think in 35 years the engineering may have improved a bit.....time will tell.

There seems to have been more problems reported with the 3.6 earlier in its production but since as it has been around for a very long time this engine has had several revisions and seems to have improved over time. The power the newer turbos are expected to produce are quite a bit more vs older applications. Look at the Sti and evo setups, producing well over 100 more hp than similar 4 cylinders, plus these modern engines are in boost quite a bit more to produce that low end torque earlier, the technology may squeeze out more power but in my experience tends to lessen the life of the engine. If the engine in the Jeep was a turbocharged 6 cylinder then I could see it as a reliable setup as it would utilize less boost. The other issue like I mentioned before is the older turbo setups ie grand national and Supra had iron blocks and were over-engineered, a trend which has unfortunately not continued in future manufacturing.

 

[phobos512]

@Bigfx1 You do understand, I hope, that materials science, metallurgy, machining, and manufacturing, have come a really long way since the late 70s when the vehicles you're citing were developed, right? Turbo engines have been en vogue again for over ten years and there are nothing like the issues seen back in those days (industry wide).

 

[Black Jeep Convertible]

Mine went through 27k miles of strangers driving it before I rescued her from the streets (rental) and it’s still going strong

 

[Bigfx1]

@Bigfx1 You do understand, I hope, that materials science, metallurgy, machining, and manufacturing, have come a really long way since the late 70s when the vehicles you're citing were developed, right? Turbo engines have been en vogue again for over ten years and there are nothing like the issues seen back in those days (industry wide).

2jz /4g63/ ej25 have all been used since the 90’s, the ej is still in use in the current sti, I have worked on turbo cars since the early 90’s . I have a pretty good understanding of engines and their composition. What I don’t like about the turbo four is the amount of boost and stress it will be under with such a large vehicle. That being said that’s why a turbo six would have been a better set up with less boost being needed all the time. The question was the reliability of the setup and IMHO the turbo engine will not be as reliable. That being said I’m not a scientist or some expect just a guy who has built and raced turbo cars for a long time and seen how long they last.

 

[Bigfx1]

Also the engine was developed with fiat and tbh their reliability hasn’t never been there strong suit. Either way most of us won’t keep these vehicles more than 60-70k miles anyways so it will be the 2nd or 3rd owners issue, unless they make us all drive electric cars lol.

 

[Windshieldfarmer]

There seems to have been more problems reported with the 3.6 earlier in its production but since as it has been around for a very long time this engine has had several revisions and seems to have improved over time. The power the newer turbos are expected to produce are quite a bit more vs older applications. Look at the Sti and evo setups, producing well over 100 more hp than similar 4 cylinders, plus these modern engines are in boost quite a bit more to produce that low end torque earlier, the technology may squeeze out more power but in my experience tends to lessen the life of the engine. If the engine in the Jeep was a turbocharged 6 cylinder then I could see it as a reliable setup as it would utilize less boost. The other issue like I mentioned before is the older turbo setups ie grand national and Supra had iron blocks and were over-engineered, a trend which has unfortunately not continued in future manufacturing.

Without a doubt the turbo motors are being driven pretty hard compared to larger NA engines. That said nothing is yet evident these engines are prone to early failure...but we shall see. I enjoy this little engine in my Recon and have been very impressed with its performance so far. I only plan to keep it four or five years or 50,000 miles so longevity is only a concern as it pertains to resale.

 

[Jsmeltz]

All I can say is make sure you keep up with those oil changes and I do recommend using premium gas although the manual does state that 87 can be used. Time will tell. But solid maintenance will always go a long way....

 

[entropy]

How would we know, its only been like 3 years lol.

Sponsored