Jeep JL Wrangler 3.6L vs 2.0T HP/TQ curve comparison (dyno chart)

[laueddy]

As I continue to do my research, while waiting for my local dealership to get a Blue JLU Rubicon, I came across many discussions about the 3.6 engine vs the 2.0T. There are also some discussion about turbo lag and there were feedbacks from the community comparing their turbo lag experience on the Subaru.

Personally, I have owned number of cars in my life, I had a 2000 Jeep WJ for about 6yrs which I took off road back then (Reason I want to get back to a real Jeep this time), then I had a 2006 STi for 5 yrs traded it for a used 2007 Porsche 997 C4S Cab. I then again traded it in for a BMW 235i XDrive Cab 1.5yrs ago. The BMW is nice & fast, but I think it's too refined for my taste, and doesn't excite me anymore like the other cars.
Comparing the 3 engines, the is laggy and need a sec to spoolup the Turbo. However, the raw surge of TQ pull hard, pure fun.

Here is the Mustang Dyno chart (I went in for a ProTune)

The Porsche engine is NA, so nice a smooth as the RPM climbs, the engine sounds great. Shift the MT down to 4000RPM, then it pull away all the way to 7K.

The BMW, well, TQ is available instantly with almost any RPM with 0 lag. The 9 speed AT is so much faster than my 2 MT when it comes to speed. (my lag of MT skill =P), but I think it's because everything is designed so perfect that I am not excited in just 1.5yrs.

I plug in some engine specs onto excel for the Jeep 3.6L & 2.0T, then the M235i. For the Jeep info, I found them on:
2.0T
http://www.automobile-catalog.com/curve/2018/2616695/jeep_wrangler_2-door_sport_2_0_turbo.html
2017 ver. 3.6
http://www.automobile-catalog.com/curve/2017/1576565/jeep_wrangler_3_6_v6_sport.html

Here is the Combined comparison excel chart, and I hope it's useful for the Jeep community.

Sponsored

 

[Sean L]

Nice!

 

[Euro JEEP]

Thanks for the work you put into gathering and processing the info!

 

[boon4376]

Some people complain about turbo lag, it kind of requires a driving style and being in the right gear. It's easy to avoid - but also has a lot to do with the vehicle itself. Subaru's are notorious for lots of lag. BMW / Volvo / Audi, not so much. I personally love that neck snapping low-end torque when the turbo kicks in, the low end growl, and the turbo whirl and blow off, but it's way more fun with a manual transmission. I wish they had a manual option with the 2.0 so bad...

 

[tarndesigns]

Some people complain about turbo lag, it kind of requires a driving style and being in the right gear. It's easy to avoid - but also has a lot to do with the vehicle itself. Subaru's are notorious for lots of lag. BMW / Volvo / Audi, not so much. I personally love that neck snapping low-end torque when the turbo kicks in, the low end growl, and the turbo whirl and blow off, but it's way more fun with a manual transmission. I wish they had a manual option with the 2.0 so bad...

Agreed on the manual version of the 2.0L

 

[That One Guy]

that's a big torque (and therefore horsepower) advantage the 2.0 has over a large section of the powerband. sure, it falls on its face at 5200 RPM, much sooner than the 3.6, but during that 2,000-5,000rpm range where you do 98% of your driving, it's got what roughly appears to be a 30hp advantage.

I'm actually surprised that the 2.0 has less 1000rpm torque, though. Maybe the 3.6 will be better offroad. Fine by me--that's the one I'm getting!

 

[thenewrick]

Pretty soon we will likely get some JL 2.0 dyno graphs.

While we're posting other dynos, Here's my BMW and Subaru dynos. Low reading Mustang AWD dyno so add about 15% to the dyno numbers to get BHP.

My 2004 STi exhaust and tune, before and after installing a carbon fiber single piece drive shaft:

2005 Baja Turbo exhaust and tune:

2007 BMW 335i exhaust and tune:

The BMW made about 550 torque at 2700 rpm with a 3.0L!

View attachment 43248

 

[laueddy]

There is a Youtube video about the eTorque system on the 2.0T.
My understanding is that eTorque Motor only kicks in between idle > 1500rpm up to 130 ft-lb when it's needed, so I have a feeling the chart above is the gas engine only w/o the eTorque system.. , but I am making a guess here.

that's a big torque (and therefore horsepower) advantage the 2.0 has over a large section of the powerband. sure, it falls on its face at 5200 RPM, much sooner than the 3.6, but during that 2,000-5,000rpm range where you do 98% of your driving, it's got what roughly appears to be a 30hp advantage.

I'm actually surprised that the 2.0 has less 1000rpm torque, though. Maybe the 3.6 will be better offroad. Fine by me--that's the one I'm getting!

 

[drogers]

Regardless of wether that chart is with etorque or gas only the battery capacity isn't enough to keep the etorque going when crawling. That may be partly why they didn't offer a manual trans with the 2.0T. The 3.6 will be more stall resistant with a manual.

That doesn’t make much sense unless you assume the auto has a lower 1st gear ratio than the manual, which I’m pretty sure ain’t the case - is it?

 

[Rockmaninoff]

In this useful comparison dyno chart put together by a JLWF member...

I plug in some engine specs onto excel for the Jeep 3.6L & 2.0T, then the M235i. For the Jeep info, I found them on:
2.0T
http://www.automobile-catalog.com/curve/2018/2616695/jeep_wrangler_2-door_sport_2_0_turbo.html
2017 ver. 3.6
http://www.automobile-catalog.com/curve/2017/1576565/jeep_wrangler_3_6_v6_sport.html

Here is the Combined comparison excel chart, and I hope it's useful for the Jeep community.

I fully agree this has been put together but it is far from useful. In fact, it's misleading for these reasons:

1. The original sources say these are approximations and not real measurements. The page says:

The Horspower / Torque Curve below was generated by the ProfessCars™ software, based on the factory data​

I.e. not real dyno measurements, not even by the factory. Here are what measured dyno figures of a JK 3.6 look like:
http://sprintexusa.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/JKPentastar3_6_12-14.pdf

Note: Two different sets of data above.

2. One is a JK Pentastar 3.6 which is not the same as the JL Pentastar 3.6 due to various updates that's supposed to improve low-mid-range torque.

3. One is a 5 speed the other is a 8 speed. The transmission can make a big difference. E.g. in the JK, the 5 speed auto puts down about 195 RWHP (see chart and Quadratec results) and the 6 speed manual puts down around 215-220 RWHP (e.g. ). Having dyno'ed mine a few times on 3 different dynos, and as this guy also explains, I know there are discrepancies between dynos and runs but you can't compare charts between the 5 speed against the 8 speed even if these were real dyno charts.

So I hate to be the messenger with a death wish here but the original post is nothing but misleading, as shown by the reasoning I gave.

 

[Ruby Jack]

Some people complain about turbo lag, it kind of requires a driving style and being in the right gear. It's easy to avoid - but also has a lot to do with the vehicle itself. Subaru's are notorious for lots of lag. BMW / Volvo / Audi, not so much. I personally love that neck snapping low-end torque when the turbo kicks in, the low end growl, and the turbo whirl and blow off, but it's way more fun with a manual transmission. I wish they had a manual option with the 2.0 so bad...

The 2015+ WRX's new FA engine with the twin scroll turbo doesn't have that much turbo lag, but the STIs are still using the older EJ engine that has the turbo lag.

I wonder if there's a reason why they don't want to give 2.0T a manual tranny. Could it be a space limitation thing or maybe it's something we can get in later models?

I'd happily trade in my JLUR m/t for a JLR with a 2.0T m/t some time down the road.

 

[Bearded_Dragon]

Here I thought I would see a real dyno graph.

 

[NCSUSTATS]

My GLC300 has a turbo-4 with similar power characteristics to the jeep turbo. Mercedes backed it with a 9 speed auto. My feeling is that with the auto’s higher number of gears you are able to take adv of a narrower power band of the turbo motor, getting more efficiency.

 

[thenewrick]

My guess is eTorque and start stop systems don't play nice with a manual.

 

[drogers]

My guess is eTorque and start stop systems don't play nice with a manual.

The 3.6 is supposed to be getting BSG (etorque) in 2019 - do you expect them to drop the 6MT at the same time?

Sponsored