Mishimoto's 2.0L Turbo JL Wrangler - First Ever Dyno Runs vs 3.6L Pentastar

Status
Not open for further replies.

Mishimoto

Well-Known Member
Rock Sponsor (Level 1)
First Name
Mishi
Joined
Jul 5, 2018
Messages
357
Reaction score
417
Location
Wilmington, DE
Vehicle(s)
Jeep Wrangler JL
Hey everybody,

Thought you'd be interested to see our (and possibly the world's?) first ever dyno run with the new 2.0T JL!

Our highest run was 227-WHP 264-WTQ - these turbo engines definitely have a decent amount of torque, and lots of torque under the curve!


0893fc10-cc6a-466e-8b37-0d0a3b00deee-png.png




UPDATED:

Hey everybody,

_mg_5920-jpg.jpg


We had a 3.6L JL in today for some product development and figured we'd run it on the same dyno that we ran our 2.0L on and share the results. Check them out! I broke out the torque and HP so you can see the differences a little clearer. All runs were done on our DynoJet, in 4th gear, both automatic transmissions, and ambient conditions were very close for each.

2.0L VS 3.6L (WTQ & WHP) | 2.0L - Blue / 3.6L - Red

20v36_all-jpg.jpg


2.0L VS 3.6L (Torque) | 2.0L - Blue / 3.6L - Red

20v36_torque-jpg.jpg


2.0L VS 3.6L (Horsepower) | 2.0L - Blue / 3.6L - Red

20v36_power-jpg.jpg




It looks like the horsepower for the 2.0 is right about dead on with a 15% drivetrain loss, but the torque is definitely underrated. I wonder if they did their calculations with the E-Torque system disabled, but that probably wouldn't affect peak torque that much.

What's really interesting to me is that the Pentastar is supposed to make 17 BHP more than the Hurricane, but they came out pretty close on the dyno. Like I said, the 3.6L did have heavier wheels and tires, but I don't know if the difference was enough to lose 14.5 WHP. :movember:

Our 2.0L has survived 8 runs on the dyno and about 800 miles so far; we'll see how it holds up!


Thanks,
-Steve





Advertisement

 
Last edited by a moderator:
OP
Mishimoto

Mishimoto

Well-Known Member
Rock Sponsor (Level 1)
First Name
Mishi
Joined
Jul 5, 2018
Messages
357
Reaction score
417
Location
Wilmington, DE
Vehicle(s)
Jeep Wrangler JL
  • Thread starter
  • Thread Starter
  • #4
Lol yes, that’s what we all want.

Is this correct? Captured at 36 seconds in your video.

0893FC10-CC6A-466E-8B37-0D0A3B00DEEE.png
Yup! Our highest run was 227-WHP 264-WTQ - these turbo engines definitely have a decent amount of torque, and lots of torque under the curve!

Thanks,
-Steve
 

coukos34

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 18, 2018
Messages
113
Reaction score
137
Location
Boston
Vehicle(s)
2014 Mini Cooper, 2016 Corvette Z51
Those are great numbers
Yup! Our highest run was 227-WHP 264-WTQ - these turbo engines definitely have a decent amount of torque, and lots of torque under the curve!

Thanks,
-Steve
Agreed. Given the average 15% driveline loss, the HP seems spot on, while the torque indicates it might be underrated from the factory
 
OP
Mishimoto

Mishimoto

Well-Known Member
Rock Sponsor (Level 1)
First Name
Mishi
Joined
Jul 5, 2018
Messages
357
Reaction score
417
Location
Wilmington, DE
Vehicle(s)
Jeep Wrangler JL
  • Thread starter
  • Thread Starter
  • #6
Those are great numbers


Agreed. Given the average 15% driveline loss, the HP seems spot on, while the torque indicates it might be underrated from the factory
Yup, pretty dead on WHP. This was also just the rear wheels, so obviously 4WD will lose some more power.

Thanks,
-Steve
 
Last edited:

StingGreyTwitch

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 15, 2018
Messages
129
Reaction score
193
Location
Louisiana
Vehicle(s)
2014 Hydro-Blue Polar Edition | 2018 Sting Grey Rubicon
Yup, pretty dead on WHP. This was also just the rear wheels, so obviously 4WD will loose some more power.

Thanks,
-Steve
Are you guys going to be working on a stage 1 and higher tuner for the Turbo?
 

FUHL

Well-Known Member
First Name
Robert
Joined
Apr 4, 2018
Messages
831
Reaction score
1,713
Location
Sandpoint Idaho
Website
cmott426.wixsite.com
Vehicle(s)
2013 F-150 Ecoboost 2018 2-door Rubicon 2013 Range Rover Evoque
Occupation
CAD Drafter/Engineer
Vehicle Showcase
1
I would like to see a comparison Dyno chart on the 2 engines.
 
OP
Mishimoto

Mishimoto

Well-Known Member
Rock Sponsor (Level 1)
First Name
Mishi
Joined
Jul 5, 2018
Messages
357
Reaction score
417
Location
Wilmington, DE
Vehicle(s)
Jeep Wrangler JL
  • Thread starter
  • Thread Starter
  • #9
Are you guys going to be working on a stage 1 and higher tuner for the Turbo?
We are not planning on releasing any tunes at this time. We mainly focus on hard parts such as radiators, intakes and intercoolers.

I would like to see a comparison Dyno chart on the 2 engines.
We'll see what we can do ;)

Thanks!
-Steve
 
Last edited:

WXman

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 1, 2017
Messages
2,509
Reaction score
2,292
Location
Central Kentucky
Vehicle(s)
2018 Wrangler Unlimited
Occupation
Meteorology and Transportation
That's the most narrow powerband I've seen on a Jeep engine in decades. Ouch.

By comparison, the Pentastar torque curve is as flat as an Oklahoma highway.
 

WXman

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 1, 2017
Messages
2,509
Reaction score
2,292
Location
Central Kentucky
Vehicle(s)
2018 Wrangler Unlimited
Occupation
Meteorology and Transportation
I would like to see a comparison Dyno chart on the 2 engines.
Notice how the stock (and tuned) PUG version of the Pentastar makes a torque curve that goes flat at 2,300 RPM and stays as flat as a pancake to redline near 6,500 RPM. That's amazing.

Compare that to the chart in this thread above for the Hurricane which flattens out some between 2,700 and 4,700 RPM only.

The results are pretty typical of tiny, DI, FI engines. They can be tuned to make a higher peak torque, but the usable power band is much much smaller overall and they run out of breath quickly on the top end. That typically makes the larger N/A engine more of a joy to drive. This is likely why early reviews on YouTube often complain of more "harshness" in the Hurricane while the Pentastar is described as "refined".

In summary, the 4-cylinder turbo makes higher peak torque, but the 6-cylinder N/A engine makes torque sooner and holds it together longer.

JLdyno3.jpg
 
OP
Mishimoto

Mishimoto

Well-Known Member
Rock Sponsor (Level 1)
First Name
Mishi
Joined
Jul 5, 2018
Messages
357
Reaction score
417
Location
Wilmington, DE
Vehicle(s)
Jeep Wrangler JL
  • Thread starter
  • Thread Starter
  • #12
In summary, the 4-cylinder turbo makes higher peak torque, but the 6-cylinder N/A engine makes torque sooner and holds it together longer.
That's a fair assessment and pretty typical of a low-displacement FI engine VS a higher-displacement NA engine. I'm curious to see what tuners will be able to do with these engines and see if they'll be able to make more power up top. Given how fast the 2.0 revs, 2700 is a pretty usable start to the torque curve; and haven driven it, I can't say I noticed turbo lag or felt like it was under-powered at low RPM.

It's tough to say where in the RPM band it starts making peak boost, but on the dyno it sounded like it was at 100% WGDC at around 4,000 RPM. So there could be some room to hold boost into the mid-5,000s and hold that torque a bit longer. I'm not sure what the A/R of the turbo is, but I have a feeling the stock tuned turbo-dynamics are pretty conservative and can be pushed a bit.

Thanks!
-Steve
 

Budagreg

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 8, 2017
Messages
178
Reaction score
259
Location
Buda, Tx
Vehicle(s)
2018 JL Rubicon 2-Door Turbo, 2012 BMW 328i, 1999 Miata, 38' Fleetwood Expedition RV
Notice how the stock (and tuned) PUG version of the Pentastar makes a torque curve that goes flat at 2,300 RPM and stays as flat as a pancake to redline near 6,500 RPM. That's amazing.

Compare that to the chart in this thread above for the Hurricane which flattens out some between 2,700 and 4,700 RPM only.

The results are pretty typical of tiny, DI, FI engines. They can be tuned to make a higher peak torque, but the usable power band is much much smaller overall and they run out of breath quickly on the top end. That typically makes the larger N/A engine more of a joy to drive. This is likely why early reviews on YouTube often complain of more "harshness" in the Hurricane while the Pentastar is described as "refined".

In summary, the 4-cylinder turbo makes higher peak torque, but the 6-cylinder N/A engine makes torque sooner and holds it together longer.

JLdyno3.jpg
Are the graphs mislabeled? all show 3.6???
 

WXman

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 1, 2017
Messages
2,509
Reaction score
2,292
Location
Central Kentucky
Vehicle(s)
2018 Wrangler Unlimited
Occupation
Meteorology and Transportation

InvertedLogic

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2018
Messages
569
Reaction score
474
Location
Denver, CO
Vehicle(s)
19 JLUR
It's tough to say where in the RPM band it starts making peak boost, but on the dyno it sounded like it was at 100% WGDC at around 4,000 RPM. So there could be some room to hold boost into the mid-5,000s and hold that torque a bit longer. I'm not sure what the A/R of the turbo is, but I have a feeling the stock tuned turbo-dynamics are pretty conservative and can be pushed a bit.
Can also play around with wastegate parameters and timing to improve turbo spool and hit full boost sooner. I've seen some FoSTs hitting 23psi at just over 2000rpm and making absolute gobs of torque.
 

Advertisement
Status
Not open for further replies.




Bestop
 



Advertisement
Top