Is there a JL E torque system delete?

[Tool Guy]

Now when the mid-cycle refresh happens and the new Hurricane I6 is an option in a Ruby 2-door, I will be one of the first to order!

And if it only comes with E-Torque?

Sponsored

 

[Mocopo]

So other than "the e torque battery is where a long range tank would go," I've yet to see any other real negative comments about the e torque.

I have e torque, and I believe I can feel the extra torque when off roading sometimes, which is cool.

 

[Yawnie'sPapa]

I am just completely and utterly fed up with the moronic decisions that Jeep constantly makes forcing customers into a f!$&*@)( corner and making it impossible to be satisfied.

LOL - misplaced anger. Jeep is forcing? Nope. They are trying to survive. Take away their ability to keep up CAFE and EPA numbers and your precious Jeep goes away. They must sell in CA, VA and the EU or go bust.
So if you say that no one will buy a Jeep if they keep forcing this on customers - you are saying Jeep won't exist so it won't matter.
EU says 0 carbon output by something like the 2030s. CA (meaning California is doing similar and VA does whatever CA does by law.
Hybrids, EVs, PHEVs, and e-torque is the way they must meet these demands - or go bust.
We may not like it, but it's here.
Or, switch to GM or Ford or Toyota and see similar things going on there.
(frankly, I love our 4xe even if I never get to drive it and we've only had it a week or so. Sort of wish my JT was more advanced)

 

[Dyolfknip74]

I know this was written in 2021 and people are saying:

* Why delete it? Just buy a model without it.
* Why would you want to delete it?
* other things here by people who don't understand how jeep backs their customers into corners and then shrinks the room inch by inch.

The latest I've found out in 2023 model year:

If you want a 3.6 Pentastar NON ETORQUE you must choose between that and an automatic transmission. YES. If you choose the automatic YOU ARE FORCED TO CHOOSE 2.0 or ETORQUE 3.6

Long range fuel tanks typically go on the other side of the vehicle opposite the main fuel tank, which means etorque = no go.

Why the long range fuel tank? BECAUSE THE GAS MILEAGE IS TRASH. I don't care about gas prices if I can increase the range. So LRF tank was a perfect idea CRUSHED by FCA's MORONIC decisions.

Diesel is great option. NOPE. They deleted it for 2023.

I am just completely and utterly fed up with the moronic decisions that Jeep constantly makes forcing customers into a f!$&*@)( corner and making it impossible to be satisfied.

Used to be if you want to get exactly what you want you custom order. Now they make it so you can NEVER get exactly what you want.

I hate this company.

Ok. Cool first post.

 

[4xFUN]

And if it only comes with E-Torque?

The current 'eTorque' is a band-aid add-on of a hybrid design...I would expect an all new motor if hybrid equipped, to have a system that was designed with the engine. What we do know is the first releases of the Hurricane are not...

 

[sherpaJL]

good eTorque explantion

 

[RLJ]

I know this in not an answer to your question but it’s what I did after 2 years of issues with my 2.0 e-torque.

Full disclosure my JL is extremely modified and almost only driven off-road, the issues I had were only off-road on hardcore trails. These issues didn’t occur on-road.

My 2019 2.0 e-torque consistently had charging problems, meaning it would not charge the engine battery for an extended period. This would then cause to a low batter warning and eventually it would correct itself and charge. Finally last summer at the end of the Rubicon trail it died and flagged a check engine light for the e-torque battery controller. My Jeep is way to modified to even mess with warranty and I wanted a Hemi anyway so I pulled everything and went with the AMW 392. Could not be happier!

 

[smokeythecat]

Here is an interesting answer to any engine mod you might be thinking about:

 

[4xFUN]

Here is an interesting answer to any engine mod you might be thinking about:

Yeah...He lost me when he said you have to take the pumpkin out to replace the locker sensor...

 

[foxwalkin]

Ok. Cool first post.

Cool flex.

I love the people telling me to buy a GM or some BS. lol. You guys are funny. You know that reality is all that matters. Laugh reactions and peoples' opinions aren't worth the pixels they're printed on.

You want to shill for FCA and be an apologist that's fine. I salute the guy that actually responded to me something of VALUE. Thanks.

This may be my first post on here but it is far from my first post in Jeep communities as a collective. And the consensus is that my complaints about FCA are stupid and unfounded.

Yet every single time I go to build a vehicle I am always presented with a situation where I feel like a king under check mate in chess. I want this, NOPE, coz then I lose that. Want that? Nope. Then I lose this.. Ok so it was available in 22. So I can pray to the different Gods of Earth that I can find a 22 with everything I want. I might want to saw off my leg and put it in an altar along with one eye ball and forearm.

But hey let's celebrate a company that constantly removes choice from the customer! Let's just ignore customer choice and that THE CUSTOMER IS THE LIFE LINE OF BUSINESS and shill for the company and say that every choice removed from the customer is in line with the success of the company. Because oh yeah that makes tons of sense.

I see this as just emotional shilling with zero rational independent thinking whatsoever. And reality is the only thing that matters. Your laugh reactions do not.

And don't even get me started on the configurator website. "Oh it must be you! Because it works just fine for me. Maybe you're using a VPN.."****

Multiple ISPs in multiple states, Multiple different computers, multiple browsers, multiple desktop devices, mobile devices, iPhone, iPad, etc. SAME PROBLEMS. But yeah It's "just me" and I'm stupid for trying to tell Jeep to fix their shit.

**** In my 30+ years of experience "It works fine for me" means they have the same problems but they're blind to it and don't really give af about it and just say that's their "slow computer" or they think it's normal. This is why I never believe those statements. Again, empirical evidence not emotion. a decade in tech support, fixing peoples' computers, etc. etc.

 

[foxwalkin]

So other than "the e torque battery is where a long range tank would go," I've yet to see any other real negative comments about the e torque.

I have e torque, and I believe I can feel the extra torque when off roading sometimes, which is cool.

Well the thing is there's nothing wrong with the eTorque that I know of. This is not a negative comment about the eTorque.

Everybody can build (or at least SHOULD be able to build) their Jeeps the way they want. That's like saying there's something wrong with the advanced safety package. Just because I don't want it doesn't mean that there's something wrong with it, but if I want to say, get mud terrains for example and it forces me to get the Advanced safety package.. That's pretty stupid. It's not a thing.... yet. And some of the other things are kind of weird glitches that you can just go to the dealer and rectify.

but the 3.6 eTorque automatic thing is not a glitch. You're literally forced to do it. And let's not forget that the original commentary for eTorque was that it compensated for turbo lag in the 2.0 .. but then now it's on the 3.6.

I have a 3.6 Gladiator and I can tell you the ESS system is imperceivable to me and trust me when I tell you, I am hyper aware of ANY lag whatsoever off the line. As soon as you let off the brake the engine starts with an imperceivable lag of any kind without eTorque.

It basically is ... Anything which is not necessary that is forced on the customer. The whole thing of "FCA is just trying to survive!!!!" dude. Put eTorque all over your lot vehicles. I don't care. but when I custom build something.. Don't force me to have things that impair the customization of the vehicle aftermarket. Especially on a vehicle that is all about customization.

Again never a problem with anything else. Any other company's vehicles the only wall to building it exactly how you want is the need to spend money to get parts.

It should be like choosing from a menu, it should not be like playing Tetris. But as always. In true authoritarian fashion. Anyone who does not agree instead of championing freedom of choice for all, they condemn freedom of choice because the lack of choice in question does not affect them, or they just simply knee-jerk angry react because someone is criticizing their beloved corporation that is supposed to please the customers.

And it's not unreasonable to ask that an engine that is available with regular setup that has been around for 10+ years with probably the SAME MODEL transmission be available in the next model year WITHOUT the eTorque if that's what the customer wants.

It was available last year. It's available this year with the manual transmission just like last year. The transmission has not changed. Basically what's changed is decisions at FCA and code on the various configurators available to the customers and dealers.

There is nothing stopping them from being built the way the customer wants other than a decision to not allow it.

And then, as the topic of this thread and its content has shown, it is a colossal hassle to remove the eTorque system once applied to the actual vehicle at the factory. I'm not arguing that this is stupid, as of course it's going to be difficult to remove a system like this.

There is no reason whatsoever why the engine must be changed from the time-tested Pentastart with alternator to this BS when you choose an automatic transmission. NONE. This is how it was last year. There is no reason for it other than a decision at FCA to force you to have it with 3.6/auto combination as opposed to 2.0/auto combination (I'm guessing) like previous years.

It's the same thing with everything else they do. You can only get 4.88 gears with the non-extreme recon package. Even though everybody knows that throwing in gears has nothing to do with tire size and tire carrier upgrades and the other stuff. Just put 4.88s instead of 4.56s ERRR! Nope. because a human decision made it so you can't.

And then you have the different options of things and how NOTHING is available aftermarket.

There is no way that FCA can survive with these problems. If they didn't have the Jeep community they'd be dead already.

"THey're trying to survive!! by screwing over the customer!" yeah that makes sense.

All that needs to happen is for the Bronco to surpass the Wrangler in off road capability and Jeep is dead. Coz that's the nature of business. THE TRUE. nature of business and competition.. Not this apologist whining "they are doing what's best for business."

People should just be real and stop being emotional. Admit the faults of FCA and be done with it. Stop defending them as if they're your first child.

 

[Yzfguy]

Wow. That's a lot of words!
I was kinda forced into etorque with my build. I'm so glad I was, I love it.

 

[Wbino]

Well the thing is there's nothing wrong with the eTorque that I know of. This is not a negative comment about the eTorque.

Everybody can build (or at least SHOULD be able to build) their Jeeps the way they want. That's like saying there's something wrong with the advanced safety package. Just because I don't want it doesn't mean that there's something wrong with it, but if I want to say, get mud terrains for example and it forces me to get the Advanced safety package.. That's pretty stupid. It's not a thing.... yet. And some of the other things are kind of weird glitches that you can just go to the dealer and rectify.

but the 3.6 eTorque automatic thing is not a glitch. You're literally forced to do it. And let's not forget that the original commentary for eTorque was that it compensated for turbo lag in the 2.0 .. but then now it's on the 3.6.

I have a 3.6 Gladiator and I can tell you the ESS system is imperceivable to me and trust me when I tell you, I am hyper aware of ANY lag whatsoever off the line. As soon as you let off the brake the engine starts with an imperceivable lag of any kind without eTorque.

It basically is ... Anything which is not necessary that is forced on the customer. The whole thing of "FCA is just trying to survive!!!!" dude. Put eTorque all over your lot vehicles. I don't care. but when I custom build something.. Don't force me to have things that impair the customization of the vehicle aftermarket. Especially on a vehicle that is all about customization.

Again never a problem with anything else. Any other company's vehicles the only wall to building it exactly how you want is the need to spend money to get parts.

It should be like choosing from a menu, it should not be like playing Tetris. But as always. In true authoritarian fashion. Anyone who does not agree instead of championing freedom of choice for all, they condemn freedom of choice because the lack of choice in question does not affect them, or they just simply knee-jerk angry react because someone is criticizing their beloved corporation that is supposed to please the customers.

And it's not unreasonable to ask that an engine that is available with regular setup that has been around for 10+ years with probably the SAME MODEL transmission be available in the next model year WITHOUT the eTorque if that's what the customer wants.

It was available last year. It's available this year with the manual transmission just like last year. The transmission has not changed. Basically what's changed is decisions at FCA and code on the various configurators available to the customers and dealers.

There is nothing stopping them from being built the way the customer wants other than a decision to not allow it.

And then, as the topic of this thread and its content has shown, it is a colossal hassle to remove the eTorque system once applied to the actual vehicle at the factory. I'm not arguing that this is stupid, as of course it's going to be difficult to remove a system like this.

There is no reason whatsoever why the engine must be changed from the time-tested Pentastart with alternator to this BS when you choose an automatic transmission. NONE. This is how it was last year. There is no reason for it other than a decision at FCA to force you to have it with 3.6/auto combination as opposed to 2.0/auto combination (I'm guessing) like previous years.

It's the same thing with everything else they do. You can only get 4.88 gears with the non-extreme recon package. Even though everybody knows that throwing in gears has nothing to do with tire size and tire carrier upgrades and the other stuff. Just put 4.88s instead of 4.56s ERRR! Nope. because a human decision made it so you can't.

And then you have the different options of things and how NOTHING is available aftermarket.

There is no way that FCA can survive with these problems. If they didn't have the Jeep community they'd be dead already.

"THey're trying to survive!! by screwing over the customer!" yeah that makes sense.

All that needs to happen is for the Bronco to surpass the Wrangler in off road capability and Jeep is dead. Coz that's the nature of business. THE TRUE. nature of business and competition.. Not this apologist whining "they are doing what's best for business."

People should just be real and stop being emotional. Admit the faults of FCA and be done with it. Stop defending them as if they're your first child.

Tell the truth ...you got kicked off the Gladiator forums.....

 

[AFD]

Was forced to get the eTorque system because I wanted a 2-door Rubi with 3.6 and auto, but still wish there would've been an option like there previously was to not order it. Sure, it's probably fine with no reported problems yet, but it's still one more thing that personally adds nothing of value for me while adding something that will eventually fail and be expensive or difficult to replace at some point (I usually keep my vehicles far past the 8-year federal warranty, and Li-Ion batteries will degrade and crap out over time). At least with dual battery ESS system, there are ways to bypass it.

Tbf, if the eTorque system added a perceptible amount of fuel saving (it does not) or a healthy amount of torque increase at all times (past 1/4 wheel turn from a stop it doesn't seem to) then I might actually have some interest and appreciation for it. The only thing the eTorque system has done for me is make it impossible to buy the exhaust system I wanted, since it encroaches too far into the area around the factory resonator.

I personally dgaf that it supposedly decreases emissions by 3 cow farts a day, or whatever nonsense. If I could maybe manage to get better than 18 to 19MPG while driving like a granny I might be impressed, but I can't even get anywhere remotely close to the 24MPG highway rating on the window sticker.

 

[foxwalkin]

Was forced to get the eTorque system because I wanted a 2-door Rubi with 3.6 and auto, but still wish there would've been an option like there previously was to not order it. Sure, it's probably fine with no reported problems yet, but it's still one more thing that personally adds nothing of value for me while adding something that will eventually fail and be expensive or difficult to replace at some point (I usually keep my vehicles far past the 8-year federal warranty, and Li-Ion batteries will degrade and crap out over time). At least with dual battery ESS system, there are ways to bypass it.

Tbf, if the eTorque system added a perceptible amount of fuel saving (it does not) or a healthy amount of torque increase at all times (past 1/4 wheel turn from a stop it doesn't seem to) then I might actually have some interest and appreciation for it. The only thing the eTorque system has done for me is make it impossible to buy the exhaust system I wanted, since it encroaches too far into the area around the factory resonator.

I personally dgaf that it supposedly decreases emissions by 3 cow farts a day, or whatever nonsense. If I could maybe manage to get better than 18 to 19MPG while driving like a granny I might be impressed, but I can't even get anywhere remotely close to the 24MPG highway rating on the window sticker.

Agreed pretty much. The eTorque wasn't ever a choice, with 2022 (I'm not sure about earlier model years) it was tied to the 2.0 turbo engine, and the opinions from articles etc. were mainly that the eTorque helped to combat the turbo lag. They said this is why Jeep put it in there..

I don't know really if it did. I think anything that has to do with EPA crap is smoke and mirrors. There is no way that stop/start saves you on gas when it basically doesn't last longer than 13 seconds anyway. The engine literally will kick back on after 13 seconds or something and then won't turn off again on the same light.

If I bought a Wrangler I would get the 2.0 turbo mostly because it doesn't have the eTorque because I definitely will be getting an LRA aux tank with whatever I get due to the range it gives which is way better than the range the Diesel has due to a smaller fuel tank thanks to the DEF requirements (again more EPA crap).

I just pray they don't ruin the Wrangler in 2024. That grille that is on the 20th anniversary ones that just came out looks like a bad omen.

Sponsored