Possible end of V-6 for Wranglers? [CLOSED DUE TO POLITICS]

[Headbarcode]

Sponsored

 

[aldo98229]

Looking at the power output of the 2.0, it is reasonable to assume that it was intended as a possible replacement for the 3.6, which has been around since before 2012. Even with the update to the 3.6, the desire is probably there to simplify the product line.

So why did the 3.6 not just get outright replaced? Probably several reasons. First, it is one of, if not the outright lowest warranty cost mass produced engine on the market. It has an excellent reputation and has been a major contributor to Chrysler's bottom line since it came out. It has won awards and alcolades and it also fits in nearly every application in the FCA portfolio. It is produced in such large numbers that the unit cost is very low, as well. Another reason was that it was a 100% safe bet in the new Wrangler. The last thing you want in a new product launch, especially of an icon, is a risky engine proposition. That's not saying the 2.0 was risky. But in the market's mind, it was new and tied to Fiat, so they really needed to offer a safe choice until it proves itself.

Now we don't know what the cost is to produce the 2.0 compared to the 3.6, and while it appears to be very reliable out of the gate, we still don't know, and probably never will know, what the warranty claim costs are compared to the 3.6. It also has not proven its longevity.....yet. But it may be getting there. If it is on a good trend, Stelantis may indeed be sticking a toe in the water to see if it would hurt Jeep sales at all to move solely to the 2.0 or to move to the 2.0 and another newly developed engine, such as the inline six we read about a year or so ago.

Another advantage of the V6, at least with older customers, is its smoother and quieter NVH characteristics. But as tastes and people's tolerance change, there may be a growing positive reception to the 2.0 enough to make the full shift.

And there's one more thing......The six is in such huge demand that FCA is in a legal entanglement with one of the block suppliers who allegedly hasn't lived up to what FCA says they agreed to supply. So one way to make up for it is to see if they can sell more 2.0 engines, easing the crunch on the Pentastars.

So there could be many reasons for it. I guarantee if the cost of the 2.0 is turning out to be less, then they'll want to push hard to increase its numbers. But I seriously doubt that the total cost, which is cost to produce plus warranty claim costs per X number of engines, is less than the 3.6. It has set a pretty tough mark to beat, according to folks I know that are in the industry. It has been the envy of other manufacturers for some time on that front.

Of course, I could be partly or even completely wrong. But I think it is a pretty educated guess and that the actual driving reason is among those I mentioned.

^^^ this!

The output figures of the V6 vs the 2.0T are so close one has to wonder why FCA even offers the two engines side-by-side.

FCA has been trying to ween customers away from the V6 for years, but every time it surveys customers, it finds out that it would shoot itself in the foot.

FCA is partly to blame. After Fiat took over, CDJR-F has tanked in the reliability rankings.

I’ve been buying Jeeps for 25 years; even I wouldn’t buy the 2.0T until it’s been in production for at least 5 years and I feel that it will last.

 

[DadJokes]

So look at percentages. What percent of power available to Texas during the peak demand and low availability came from natural gas, coal, wind, solar? Was solar and wind providing the most? Where is that data?

 

[Jimac]

This may not mean anything, but I received a survey from Jeep today. The questions in the survey were focused around 2.0L Turbo vs. 3.6L V6. One of the last questions was whether I would still get a Wrangler or not get one if only the 2.0L Turbo was offered.

Just thought it was interesting.

Yes If you are looking at 2021 the 2.0L is 0 cost standard 3.6L V-6 cost $1500 option another way to do away with V-6

 

[No IFS]

Truth Warning ! Be careful.

 

[ScoobyBlue]

Oh, and I think Texas just proved that fossil fuels are going to be around for a good while to come, in spite of what the free bubble-up and Rainbow Stew crowd might dream.

why do people need to resort to high school age name calling and crap.....

Texas has about 80-85% of their supply from fossil fuel, which failed. As did renewables. But the systems, all over the place, were not maintained and upgraded. They are on their own grid (about 90% of the state) and kept it that way to avoid federal regulation, which would’ve required they maintain and upgrade. So there’s no proof to that claim.

Because they are on their own grid, the rest of the nation’s grid could not help them and supply or divert more power to them.

I think if Alaska and Antarctica use wind turbines and renewables for sources, you can bet they hold up to cold.

 

[DadJokes]

why do people need to resort to high school age name calling and crap.....

Texas has about 80-85% of their supply from fossil fuel, which failed. As did renewables. But the systems, all over the place, were not maintained and upgraded. They are on their own grid (about 90% of the state) and kept it that way to avoid federal regulation, which would’ve required they maintain and upgrade. So theirs no proof to that claim.

Because they are on their own grid, the rest of the nation’s grid could not help them and supply or divert more power to them.

I think if Alaska and Antarctica use wind turbines and renewables for sources, you can bet they hold up to cold.

What’s their output vs fossil fuel at the coldest temps seen? Can you point us to that data?

 

[neil]

funny, I have a pair of 3.6 in the driveway and did not get this survey.

guess they know.

 

[SleepEatJeepRepeat]

Wake me up when the 2.0T doesn't sound and feel like a Nissan Versa drivetrain. It's a truck, an off-road sports car - it should have a burbly V6 at minimum under the hood. I probably wouldn't have bought one if the 4-cylinder was the only option, especially for the 2 door which doesn't get 392 or diesel trims.

Love my JLR to death but I'd easily go Bronco and option the twin turbo V6 now that we've got options, in case Jeep goes full econobox.

I have the 4 banger now, and it's noisy sounds like an old diesel truck.. if you want a powerful sound you should get the 4 banger.. I am actually getting a new jeep and getting the v6 because it's not as noisy

 

[ScoobyBlue]

What’s their output vs fossil fuel at the coldest temps seen? Can you point us to that data?

Their output is not as close because they are outnumbered by fossil. But in Texas, it provides about 15%, or maybe it was 18%, of the state’s need. Not at all bad considering it hasn’t been around near as long as fossil plants.

However, remember when it first came out how minimal it was? Now there’s home solar.

Computers used to be the size of small homes. Now most hold a powerful computer in their hand with their phone. It would be unnatural to think it won’t improve.

Burning fossil fuels will always produce negative environmental effects. And fossil fuels companies are investing in renewables. Don’t change with the times and the company will die. They are changing but people want to be stuck in an idea because it’s comfortable to them.

No, I will not provide studies. Y’all can look it up. And I’m not being nasty in that. My point is even big oil companies are diversifying from fossil fuels, and people want to name call, blame an administration, or believe the internal combustion engine won’t go the way of the IBM typewriters and phone books, or even educate themselves to what will happen regardless of wanting a V6 OR a Hemi.

 

[The Pointer]

Ok, and how about California? Who has been running it? I don't think the Democrats have a corner on the market with good decisions, either. They have rolling blackouts all the time in the best of weather and nobody seems to notice. I think their model is actually much worse.

The fact is that we've moved too green too fast in some places. And on top of that, I don't really think it is fair to pass judgement over performance during a once in a century event.

Imagine if California has a once in a century event? Yikes!

Meanwhile, the US now shuts down our own oil pipeline but provides money for the Taliban pipeline. Go figure.

California has had problems with the federal government not doing proper maintenance in the forests. Fires caused by subpar maintenance and criminal behavior is their issue. ERCOT is for profit and cares very little about what happens otherwise. They know winter is coming and failed to prepare for this. If you drove your vehicles and never prepared or maintained them you are putting everyone at risk.
Enron, a failed Texas company, caused CA many of their electric power outages. As I recall, they thought that it was funny.
The Middle East is an investment and many US companies are dependent on their income. I don’t invest in the stock market so I don’t care, but am aware of how it works.
Hoping and praying is not a solution for a potential problem.
Those green options created excellent paying jobs too and they still are.

 

[DadJokes]

As a former engine builder, I like the mechanical sounds the 2.0 makes. The 3.6 in my 17 JK with 12k miles isn’t much if any better on cold startup.

 

[neil]

Their output is not as close because they are outnumbered by fossil. But in Texas, it provides about 15%, or maybe it was 18%, of the state’s need. Not at all bad considering it hasn’t been around near as long as fossil plants.

However, remember when it first came out how minimal it was? Now there’s home solar.

Computers used to be the size of small homes. Now most hold a powerful computer in their hand with their phone. It would be unnatural to think it won’t improve.

Burning fossil fuels will always produce negative environmental effects. And fossil fuels companies are investing in renewables. Don’t change with the times and the company will die. They are changing but people want to be stuck in an idea because it’s comfortable to them.

No, I will not provide studies. Y’all can look it up. And I’m not being nasty in that. My point is even big oil companies are diversifying from fossil fuels, and people want to name call, blame an administration, or believe the internal combustion engine won’t go the way of the IBM typewriters and phone books, or even educate themselves to what will happen regardless of wanting a V6 OR a Hemi.

Love the thread drift, but until I can get a drop in electric motor and battery that has the range and recharge/refill time rate of petrol, I am burning dinos, and in a 3.6

 

[aldo98229]

If next time I got to buy a JL I can’t get the V6, then I’ll likely buy a Gladiator instead.

 

[ScoobyBlue]

California has had problems with the federal government not doing proper maintenance in the forests. Fires caused by subpar maintenance and criminal behavior is their issue. ERCOT is for profit and cares very little about what happens otherwise. They know winter is coming and failed to prepare for this. If you drove your vehicles and never prepared or maintained them you are putting everyone at risk.
The Middle East is an investment and many US companies are dependent on their income. I don’t invest in the stock market so I don’t care, but am aware of how it works.

ERCOT is a nonprofit. At least that’s what they just said ten minutes ago??

And yeah, CA should have problems with the federally owned forests....but it takes money to do all that clearing and brush burning and maintaining. But, people want lower taxes, and then lower and lower taxes. It’s not free, but one gets what one pays for. If there’s no money in the budgets to pay for it, it can’t be done. This is what taxes pay for, until there are so little taxes that’s there’s nothing left to pay....

Sponsored