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

[DanW]

When power goes out in California it is California's fault.

When power goes out in Texas somehow it is still California's fault...

No. But when someone wants to play politics and blame one party while completely ignoring the failure of another, well, California sticks out like a sore thumb.

Sponsored

 

[multicam]

Looks like I would have to buy a diesel, V6, OH, HOW are they doing with charging their battery cars in Texas? My daughter hasn't had heat in four days and people are sleeping in their gas car, with heater on.

word. I’m charging my phone in my jeep now while waiting for my mu shu pork order to be done. I got sick of MREs
I’ve had a hard enough time keeping my phones and laptop charged for (tele)work this week; I’d hate to have to worry about keeping a tesla charged.

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.

Dan normally I love your posts and read them carefully but I’m gonna have to come back to this thread later and finish reading the whole thing.

in the real world shit happens and nothing beats burning dead dino’s!
Later guys, I got chinese food to eat and a fire to tend to

 

[DanW]

Turns out, the misery in Texas is coming mostly from fossil fuel energy sources, primarily natural gas, not green sources, which the governor would prefer to blame.

Hmm. Fossil fuels seem to work everywhere else. My home was nice and toasty with a nice, steady supply of power. Never a rolling blackout in my lifetime. All courtesy of fossil fuels.

 

[TJJL19]

I had a 4 cylinder motorcycle and don't want a 4 cylinder in my heavy Jeep, give me a 6 and that's what I got.

 

[The Last Cowboy]

I got the survey. It was much longer than most I’ve taken.

ERCOT is a non profit. It is the end result of the idea to privative public utilities. The top 5 people on the executive board live in other states. They have a green energy agenda and believe that carbon footprints must be reduced. They have worked hard to take coal and NG plants offline or leave them off for extended periods. They did not spend money to winterize the NG plants and many were offline as these months in Texas are generally low demand. The concept of juggling just enough GWs to meet demand bit them in the ass. This is a big wake up call to them and the rest of the country. This caused anger at levels unseen. We still don’t know how many dead people are sitting in their houses. At my house we had no power for 40 hours during single digit and teen temperatures. There is no excuse for that. Utilities are a public trust and privatizing them has failed miserably and perilously. Don’t even get me started on the privatized highway systems etc. Infrastructure needs to be maintained for all who use it, not as a way to pay a board of directors bonuses for cuttings costs. All proceeds should be used to maintain and improve the system, not for incentives, free solar panels, electric car rebates, political action contributions etc. Just because they’re non profit doesn’t mean they don’t waist money.

 

[SleepEatJeepRepeat]

I think you are wrong.

https://www.wfaa.com/article/news/v...rify/287-6bcde08d-80a0-47cc-9181-f4a45044fcf2

 

[Spank]

I think that we are in the end days of the internal combustion engine. Everything is going electric. I just don't know how we can take a cross country road trip in an electric vehicle.

I don't think the end days are as close as we think and it's because of this.

EVs aren't the problem. Infrastructure and convenience are. People ultimately change their habits and ways of things when alternatives are easier and more convenient, even if they're more expensive. Right now, it's still easier to fill up a tank of gas and it's still easier to trek across the country because of gas stations.

EV charging has gotten better just in the last few years, but it still takes too long to fully charge a battery and there's no guarantee you're gonna make it to the next charging station because they're still not available in many remote areas of the country. It doesn't matter if a charge is twice the cost of gas. It just needs to take less time and effort.

When people can plug any vehicle into a charging station and get a full charge in less than 5-10 minutes and know they can confidently charge again no matter what direction they travel, you'll see the ICE die real fast. But this doesn't exist yet and we're not really moving in that direction very quickly, either. It'll happen, but I don't see it within the next 10 years.

 

[neil]

I want a nuclear-powered jeep. Figure an aircraft carrier can go 25 years, a wrangler should make 100 easy.

the lights would be awesome

 

[SleepEatJeepRepeat]

the lights would be awesome

Ya but if you grow extra toe's that would be a bummer.

 

[Flyn G]

I haven’t received the survey. I wanted a manual Bronco. I will not buy a turbo for a start/stop short mileage vehicle. So back to Jeep in a manual. No turbo. I haven’t even tagged it yet and get a recall on the clutch. SMH.

 

[neil]

Ya but if you grow extra toe's that would be a bummer.

clutch finesse

 

[dgoodhue]

I went to the dealership thinking we would buy 2.0T motor. I like and prefer turbo motors, my daily driver is Turbo Subaru, my go fast vehicle is Turbo V6 and I have driven many turbo 4 cylinders. The Jeep Turbo 4 was noisy and probably the worst sounding stock turbo 4 cylinder I have driven, the V6 etorque sound pleasing and they seem to have similar WOT acceleration. On the test drive, I was able to figure out haw make it sound better by squeezing the throttle to spool the turbo, but my girlfriend just made is sound like crap when she drove it. I want to like the 2.0T but I left the dealer adding another $1500 to MSRP for Pentastar V6. If they made it sound better (or quieter) I would have ordered the 2.0T.

 

[BuyHold]

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.

I also received the same email today. The 2.0LT is better on paper regarding torque and MPGs. Nevertheless, I ordered the 3.6L and similar to other folks in the forum here, did so because of proven reliability of the Pentastar and the fact that it is the only engine option offered with a manual. I really wish they would put a Cummins in the Jeep rather than the space-age EcoDiesel. Yeah, I understand that emission standards are a hindrance to diesels.

 

[brewski]

No clutch, no sale. . . long live the 3.6!

that is what I used to say until I test drove the diesel. I've never owned an automatic vehicle in almost 30 years of driving and I now bought an automatic.

 

[RubiJR]

California is on Federal welfare. High taxes and High level of corruption. We have High speed trains to nowhere but consultants thinking about it while making millions. Anyway back to the V6. And now a V8 coming along with an electric. Seems there is room for everyone. Just think of the value your jeep will maintain after 2035

Sponsored