No ETorque for 3.6l/auto for 2024?

[Jtphoto]

Maybe... but have yet to see it.

I have seen it and I’ve driven both. You do have to get on that 2.0 when wheeling to get it to work while the 3.6 especial the eTorque is smoother power going in.

Sponsored

 

[Dusty Dude]

Mechanical engineer here - I searched high and low for a 3.6 without eTorque and had mine shipped up the coast to get it. Disabling ESS on a 3.6 non eTorque is the right move for long term reliability and low cost of ownership.

The other drivetrains are for compliance, not the consumer.

Gasoline direct injection still hasn't gotten out of the teething phase, and is still creating expensive problems for consumers for a few percent in power and economy.

We think entirely alike. I was thrilled to find out I could get a non ETorque 3.6 new and can immediately disable ESS/bypass a much cheaper AUX battery.

 

[TheRaven]

I bet if you find someone that had the 2.0 then switched to the 3.6 they would tell you they prefer the 3.6.

*raises hand*

(that's me)

 

[Jtphoto]

We think entirely alike. I was thrilled to find out I could get a non ETorque 3.6 new and can immediately disable ESS/bypass a much cheaper AUX battery.

LOL, And you will have to change that AUX battery or bypass that as well. That’s a fact.
Other than that it’s the identical same 3.6 engine for both systems and both equally complicated. I’ve now had both and much prefer the E Torque. The ESS and Aux battery are a PITA and I understand why people want to delete it. The eTorque is not like that at all. I does save fuel if you are in stop and go city driving. I’ve seen as much as 2mpg difference between using ESS or not. But most of the time I’m on the highway so it’s a non issue one way or the other.
If in 8-10 years if I still have this Jeep, which is unlikely as I put on 40k Klm a year, I’m sure by then there will be a conversion to one standard battery and an Alternator or a Hemi swap if I so choose. Lol.

 

[speedymart]

Factory tech here but I strongly suggest the 3.6l over the 2.0l

The difference in engine management and ease of repair is night and day between the two engines. The 2.0 has been relatively reliable fleetwide so far, but it is an absolute nightmare to work on compared to the 3.6

The 2.0 is running at max ability to even power something as heavy as the wrangle, so wear and tear is accelerated

I'd also avoid the e-torque if you plan on keeping the vehicle for a long time (decade+) as the 48v hybrid system is a hold over technology to replace the horrible stop/start dual battery system until PHEV systems become more wide spread. Getting parts for it down the line will literally be impossible

 

[Dusty Dude]

Factory tech here but I strongly suggest the 3.6l over the 2.0l

The difference in engine management and ease of repair is night and day between the two engines. The 2.0 has been relatively reliable fleetwide so far, but it is an absolute nightmare to work on compared to the 3.6

The 2.0 is running at max ability to even power something as heavy as the wrangle, so wear and tear is accelerated

I'd also avoid the e-torque if you plan on keeping the vehicle for a long time (decade+) as the 48v hybrid system is a hold over technology to replace the horrible stop/start dual battery system until PHEV systems become more wide spread. Getting parts for it down the line will literally be impossible

Thank you so much for your insight. I had come to the same conclusion for long term ownership, and it is nice to hear a confirmation from an independent source.

 

[speedymart]

Yeah, a normal 3.6l with the stop/start delete/bypass is 100% the way to go for the highest level of reliability from the current wrangler lineup except the 392

On a side note, running 89 octane instead of 87 octane on the newer 3.6l's gives a sizeable jump in performance under hard acceleration. Doubt it'll give you any improved mileage, but you can definitely feel the timing being pulled on 87. It's especially noticeable on the gladiator

I wouldn't run the 2.0 on anything except 91+, as on 87 you're quite literally asking the engine to retard itself into a base state with simply horrible gas mileage. If you've got a 2.0l run 91+ always. Yes it's designed to allow 87 without destroying itself, but it sure as hell isn't happy about it. The money you're saving at the pump is probably lost to the lower MPG anyway

 

[Robby Robot]

Please understand, I am an engineer and an ex-mechanic. I am not trying to be snarky or condescending in any way, just factual, so please take the following comments with a grain of salt.

One thing that I have learned over the years: the KISS rule. The less complicated something is, the better chance that it will last longer with less chance of failure. I research vehicles more on their long term reliability potential than the latest or greatest features.

Newer turbo engines have reduced the lag time, but it is still there and the end result is the same: torque output is more “jumpy”, peaky and non-linear. If you go to regular vs premium fuel, then engine management has to pull timing and lower boost to prevent pre-detonation(knock). The harder you make a little engine work to act like a big engine the less reliable it will become. I haven’t even mentioned direct injection and it’s possible long term issues.

ETorque has an extra proprietary 48V battery and charging system on top of a 12V charging system. For what? To save a sip of fuel at a stop light that gets used dragging all that extra weight around all the time. Starting an engine under load with zero oil pressure is an asinine idea. A 80K warranty doesn’t do you any good if you are going to plan on keeping your ride for a minimum of 175K miles.


This is a snarky comment: ”Fourth, do your homework, most feel the 2.0 is a better choice.”

Homework is called research. “Feel” is not research. “A better choice” based on what?


Anyway, getting back on topic: Has ETorque been discontinued?

From software engineering (not mechanical) I still find much to agree with here. Simple systems are better (French for "more reliable") systems. I rode BMW motorcycles for years and they are as overly-engineered as HP printers, meaning when they are operating in spec they are outstanding. But when performance is based on so many interdependent systems, one failure (bushing, seal, sensor, etc.) levels the playing field dramatically. As my QC engineer-father used to say, "Displacement is pretty reliable."

I drove the 2.7L twin-turbo Bronco and it was an outstanding machine. Almost zero lag. Great handling, etc. But when you raise the hood it's like looking in the maintenance panel of an F-16. Just couldn't do it and feel comfortable.

Yes, the eTorque/ESS systems worry me from a wear perspective. Not sure I'd buy one used with high mileage. Call me an old lady. But 80k warrantees are cold comfort while waiting for a tow truck.

 

[speedymart]

From software engineering (not mechanical) I still find much to agree with here. Simple systems are better (French for "more reliable") systems. I rode BMW motorcycles for years and they are as overly-engineered as HP printers, meaning when they are operating in spec they are outstanding. But when performance is based on so many interdependent systems, one failure (bushing, seal, sensor, etc.) levels the playing field dramatically. As my QC engineer-father used to say, "Displacement is pretty reliable."

I drove the 2.7L twin-turbo Bronco and it was an outstanding machine. Almost zero lag. Great handling, etc. But when you raise the hood it's like looking in the maintenance panel of an F-16. Just couldn't do it and feel comfortable.

Yes, the eTorque/ESS systems worry me from a wear perspective. Not sure I'd buy one used with high mileage. Call me an old lady. But 80k warrantees are cold comfort while waiting for a tow truck.

The eEtorque and ESS systems are completely different beasts. The ESS can be outright deleted and swapped to a normal single battery system without issue (and it takes like 20 minutes) while the eTorque is completely integrated into the charging system and you're stuck with it.

The eTorque is a fantastic system but both the MGU and the PPU are both additional failure points that most people would rather not need. The 8 year warranty on the components is neat, but it's a moot point when you're waiting 1-3 months for parts.

I just replaced a PPU on a 2023 wagoner (5.7l eTorque) with 5k miles on it due to it not charging. It took about 35 days to get here. I also replaced a failed MGU on a 3.6L eTorque ram last week that took nearly 2 months to show up. It's not a pretty situation.

 

[Robby Robot]

The eEtorque and ESS systems are completely different beasts. ...

Yes, you're correct. I did not mean to conflate the two like that. I merely bypassed the ESS in the engine bay, but deleting the extra batt is enticing.

 

[speedymart]

Yes, you're correct. I did not mean to conflate the two like that. I merely bypassed the ESS in the engine bay, but deleting the extra batt is enticing.

Pull out the primary battery, unclip the PDC and loosen the 3 7mm bolts holding the PDC wiring in and just flip up and towards the engine. Hold it up with a bungee cord. Remove the 3 screws holding the PDC tray in, then remove the 4 bolts holding the aux-battery access cover. Remove the aux battery and simply route the B+ cable up to the normal battery B+ terminal. You can also remove the fender liner and totally remove the power control relay and wiring while leaving the normal bypass in place, but it's kind of pointless.

The removal of the aux battery from the top takes me about 5 minutes, but i've replaced over 100 of them at this point.

 

[Symore]

I ordered a 2023 2dr Rubicon with the 3.6l ETorque. After researching I canceled the order not knowing it was a mild Hybrid when ordered . Now waiting for my 2.0t Rubicon to be delivered. The 2023 2Dr with auto trans was only available with the 3.6l Etorque or 2.0t without Etorque. I am not very happy about not having a choice with the V6 engine. My reasoning for the 2.0t is the 2dr will be lighter and maybe not put as much stress on the engine for long term reliability. It is sad that this electrification process is slowly be forced on us.

 

[Jtphoto]

Pull out the primary battery, unclip the PDC and loosen the 3 7mm bolts holding the PDC wiring in and just flip up and towards the engine. Hold it up with a bungee cord. Remove the 3 screws holding the PDC tray in, then remove the 4 bolts holding the aux-battery access cover. Remove the aux battery and simply route the B+ cable up to the normal battery B+ terminal. You can also remove the fender liner and totally remove the power control relay and wiring while leaving the normal bypass in place, but it's kind of pointless.

The removal of the aux battery from the top takes me about 5 minutes, but i've replaced over 100 of them at this point.

When the eTorque systems get older and worn out there will be ways to bypass that as well. The only reason it’s not done yet is it’s really not a problem on the eTorque yet, unlike the ESS with aux battery. As far as waiting on parts, that’s just luck of the draw. I needed a wheel speed sensor that was back ordered over a month and A shock that took 4 months…

 

[newbie5150]

I bet if you find someone that had the 2.0 then switched to the 3.6 they would tell you they prefer the 3.6.

I had a 2021 JLUR with the 2.0 and now I have a 2023 JLUR with the 3.6 etorque. While I like both engines, the 3.6 is a much smoother powertrain with no lag and no whiny sound.

 

[Robby Robot]

Pull out the primary battery, unclip the PDC and loosen the 3 7mm bolts holding the PDC wiring in and just flip up and towards the engine. Hold it up with a bungee cord. Remove the 3 screws holding the PDC tray in, then remove the 4 bolts holding the aux-battery access cover. Remove the aux battery and simply route the B+ cable up to the normal battery B+ terminal. You can also remove the fender liner and totally remove the power control relay and wiring while leaving the normal bypass in place, but it's kind of pointless.

The removal of the aux battery from the top takes me about 5 minutes, but i've replaced over 100 of them at this point.

Thanks for this! I'll wait to see if I pull the trigger on a '24. If not, I'll give it a try with my current rig.

Sponsored