Prepurchase Questions - Current Owner Experiences Appreciated

[Eyeball]

Hello guys… I am new to the forum but not Jeeps. My Jeep addiction started with 1989 Jeep YJ and I have been tooling around the rocks in the California desert in a highly modified and very capable 1997 TJ for the last 15 years.

I tend to keep my vehicles a very long time. I bought my newest car in 2006. With that in mind, I won’t feel bad about buying what I want and accessorizing it to my tastes. I am beginning to play around with the Jeep website to understand the options in buying a new JLUR.

I plan to hold on to my TJ for more extreme trails but want to build a very capable JLUR for day trips on milder trails, an occasional trip to Moab and maybe some overlanding. Unlike my TJ, I want a reasonable comfortable ride to and from the trails as well to work everyday.I am hoping I can tap into the community knowledge base to help me avoid any buyers remorse and would appreciate your input on a few things:

1. I am planning on going with the JLUR with the factory 35” wheel package, the V6 with eTorque and the 8 speed auto. Unless I receive some compelling feed back here to point me another direction.
   
   
2. Ultimately when the first set of tires wear out I will likely upgrade to 37’s. Any thoughts on the 4.56 vs 4.88 gear ratio?
   
   
3. I am unfamiliar with eTorque. Any opinions for current owners? In particular, will it hamper me when it comes to selection of belly armor, tummy tuck ( if that is even reasonably possible on a JL), or offroad reliability?
   
   
4. Rocktrack transfer case - it seems that the full time 4wd system is completely different than the system in my TJ. Given that the roads in Southern California are usually dry and other than overlanding trips and an occasional trip to the mountains, I rarely see snow or rain. Are there and significant advantages the the full time 4wd system?
   
5. Any thoughts on the half door packages?

I am sure I will have more questions and I think this purchase through and appreciate your thoughts.

Sponsored

 

[Turaven]

I really liked the etorque motor when I was test driving all the drivetrains. I felt the more immediate throttle response of a naturally aspirated engine, combined with that little extra bit of torque from a dead stop to fill in the lack of low-end torque on the V6 paired together fairly well. I also don't like the premium fuel "requirement" of the 2.0L. I'll get flamed to death for suggesting it's a requirement, but I'd never get a turbo engine and have it choke on low octane gas and have the ECU nerf the timing/power to compensate.

However, if you're looking at keeping the JL for a long time and adding bigger tires, you might want to consider the 2.0L. It has much more torque to handle the bigger tires, and the long-term reliability of etorque is still a bit of a question mark, IMO. Neither engine is the correct or optimal choice, just have to pick which basket you want to put your eggs in.

As for the half-doors, they're fantastic, and also fantastically expensive. If you've got the money, go for it. I don't think the half doors look as good as they used to on an old 2-door Wrangler. A new 4-door has so many reinforcement/safety bars on it that you're losing half your door, but you're still caged in and lose a lot of the openness that the half doors provide.

 

[oldcjguy]

Sounds like you wouldn't get any advantage at all from fulltime 4wd. I don't think it's a torque biased system it just automates on and off (as there is still a fad?). But I could be wrong. Either way I'd go regular part-time 4wd.

Engine, you really can't go wrong with either. If you're at altitude a lot the 2.0 is probably a better choice. Turbos shine at altitude and naturally aspirated engines all suffer at altitude. Both are great engines.

For the gearing... not sure. 4.56 is probably fine even for 37s for what you want. It may come down to the engine. The 2.0 makes more torque down low than the 3.6 and you probably wouldn't notice an issue with 4.56 and 37s. It would likely be the equivalent of running 35s with 4.10. The guys with 2.0 don't seem to have an issue with 4.10 and generally recommend not going to 4.56. Guys with 3.6 are 50/50. If you're going 3.6 and travel in the mountains a bunch and going 37s then I'd vote 4.88.

If you know you're definitely going 37 right out of the gate, the 4.88 might not be a bad choice. Let others chime in on that one as well.

Just opinions here. Hope thsat helps

 

[191185]

You can only get 4.88's from the factory if you order a manual ... FYI .

 

[Steph1]

Welcome,

I've owned 2 YJs purchased new in 1987 and 1990. I also owned a 1999 TJ sahara and 2013 JKUR10A prior to my current 2018 JLU Sahara.

1. I chose the Pentastar V6 in 2018 because it was the most reliable one offered at the time. However, it's the non e-torque which I don't know much about, so I'll let the guys that actually own one chime-in. I can say however, that the 8 spd auto is nothing short of fantastic.

2. I find my Jeep on 35s with 4.56 to be an absolutely perfect combo, but feel that if 37s are in your future, I'd opt opt for 4.88s.

4. The Selec-trac transfer is the absolute best I've ever had in a wrangler for winter driving because it does its wonders thanks to the fact that it works hand in hand with the rear trac-lok LSD. However, the JKURs do not have an LSD because of the lockers. Not sure I see the benefits of it without the rear LSD or If you don't experience snow or even frequent rain.

5. Both my YJs which I've owned from automn 1986-1996 had half doors and I totally was a full hard doors wannabe. 1. It is an absolute pain to zip-unzip at a drive through, so much so that I'd move forward and open the door instead. 2. You can't crack a window down 3. I'd rather be without doors than with half doors. The very best door set-up for trail day is Bestop 2 piece soft doors. You can drive half doors if that's your thing, they stow easily in the back without taking all the room or risk damage and you can throw them-on in the evening if it gets cold on your ride back home.

Cheers and good luck.

 

[m3reno]

I went with the 3.6 has having owned (non jeep) turbo cars, things seem to wear down faster. I also didn't go with the e torque because it has a huge 48 volt battery underneath the drivers side.

 

[AcesandEights]

I have a JLR, V6, 4.88.

1. You're spot on with your choice. Don't change it (no need to read further, just order it already).
2. I think you would appreciate the 4.56 gearing and it would be great up to 37" tires since you'd have the automatic trans.
3. The 3.6L is one of the most reliable engines out there; although, I don't have the e-torque. I don't believe the e-torque makes it any less reliable, on road or off.
4. The 231 in your TJ (if you still have the stock t-case) is totally different than the full-time unit in the JLUR. I'd stick with the 241 (not the select-trac). I *think* the 241 is a stronger t-case, but I don't have any evidence of that. I had a Select-Trac in an XJ (it was completely different, but same name) and it was great when I needed full-time 4WD (I live in a valley that sees four seasons), but it was so infrequent that I think for you it would have no advantage. The full-time t-case is a detriment in your case.
5. Half-doors are cool, but cost WAAAYYY too much.

I would look at the dealerships on this forum that offer below invoice pricing (Peterson's) and order exactly what you want for less than you can find anywhere else.

 

[Eyeball]

I have decided since I only buy a new car every 15-20 years I can splurge a bit. So a little more on engine choices:

1. 2.0 with turbo - my initial reaction I’d the age old thought of there is no replacement for displacement. Am I missing something?
   
   
2. 3.6 with eTorque (not interested in a manual but want to build a very capable JLUR for day trips on milder trails, an occasional trip to Moab and maybe some overlanding. Unlike my TJ, I want a reasonable comfortable ride to and from the trails as well to work everyday.ransmission)- I am unsure if this choice will result in an limitations on future build plans. Will it limit lift, skid plate, belly up mods or have unintended consequences for someone that will use this to play in the rocks in the desert, daily drive, and occasionally o errand with the Jeep.
   
   
3. Diesel 3.0 - I know nothing about diesels other than this might be the last year they are offered in Wranglers and that would worry me.
   
   
4. 392 - it’s expensive and I don’t want to needlessly throw away money but likely the last time I will be able to buy a Jeep with a V8. I am concerned about what limitations packing that larger and heavier engin into the Jeep has on future mods. Is it modified in a way that will make it an “odd ball” with limited options for lifts and other offroad performance accessories? Issues with rubbing on larger wheels that might not be an issue with the physically smaller engines?

As you share your thoughts, keep in mind my goal to “build a very capable JLUR for day trips on milder trails, an occasional trip to Moab and maybe some overlanding. Unlike my TJ, I want a reasonable comfortable ride to and from the trails as well to work everyday.”

 

[Bocephus]

I have decided since I only buy a new car every 15-20 years I can splurge a bit. So a little more on engine choices:

1. 2.0 with turbo - my initial reaction I’d the age old thought of there is no replacement for displacement. Am I missing something?
   
   
2. 3.6 with eTorque (not interested in a manual but want to build a very capable JLUR for day trips on milder trails, an occasional trip to Moab and maybe some overlanding. Unlike my TJ, I want a reasonable comfortable ride to and from the trails as well to work everyday.ransmission)- I am unsure if this choice will result in an limitations on future build plans. Will it limit lift, skid plate, belly up mods or have unintended consequences for someone that will use this to play in the rocks in the desert, daily drive, and occasionally o errand with the Jeep.
   
   
3. Diesel 3.0 - I know nothing about diesels other than this might be the last year they are offered in Wranglers and that would worry me.
   
   
4. 392 - it’s expensive and I don’t want to needlessly throw away money but likely the last time I will be able to buy a Jeep with a V8. I am concerned about what limitations packing that larger and heavier engin into the Jeep has on future mods. Is it modified in a way that will make it an “odd ball” with limited options for lifts and other offroad performance accessories? Issues with rubbing on larger wheels that might not be an issue with the physically smaller engines?

As you share your thoughts, keep in mind my goal to “build a very capable JLUR for day trips on milder trails, an occasional trip to Moab and maybe some overlanding. Unlike my TJ, I want a reasonable comfortable ride to and from the trails as well to work everyday.”

there are great bellypan options for the 2.0, 3.6 e torque and 392. Artec, Metalcloak, RockHard and others. Engine choice is not a limiting factor at
for skids / bellypans.

same for lift kits, all the major manufacturers have options spanning engine options.

- the 392 if mpg/range and cost are not highest priorities. An absolute cherry power plant. You won’t suffer from a lack of after market support. truly a special jeep, and as you said, NA v8s are not going to be around too much longer. Just pure fun. Weighs more. My mpg on 38s ranges 11 to near 17 depending city vs highway and right foot.

- go 3.6 for smooth and reliable power, with 87 octane. The standard fare. I had a six speed (manual) JLUR on 37s with this engine, geared 5.13. Adequate. Regrettably went down forced induction paths. Wife is getting a 2 door rubi, 3.6 with the 8 speed auto trans. I think this will be great. Will do a small lift and 35s.

- go 2.0 if you drive at altitude, enjoy turbo driving characteristics (boosty vs linear), and don’t care so much about exhaust note. I have a friend with this engine in a 4 door rubi. Id say it feels quick and more torquey around town compared to the 3.6, but I prefer the 3.6 NA power delivery. Not a fan of the 2.0 exhaust note, but thats such a minor consideration for many people.

 

[FloridaMan]

I have a Gladiator with the 3.6 non etorque on 37s with 4.88 gears, I was satisfied with it until I got my 392. If you have the money for it, get the 392. I’m getting 13.3/4 MPG on my 392XR. I don’t drive it like an ape, but there are moments my right foot gets into it. Having the power on tap is such a good feeling, hearing the symphony of power from the Hemi is intoxicating.

I’d stay far away from etorque if you plan on holding onto yours. If the 392 isn’t a real consideration, I’d go 2.0T simply to avoid etorque and as others have said, it has more torque.

Gearing no matter the engine should go as follows:

31” 3.73
33” 4.10
35” 4.56
37” 4.88
39” 5.13
40”+ 5.38

 

[Eyeball]

I have a Gladiator with the 3.6 non etorque on 37s with 4.88 gears, I was satisfied with it until I got my 392. If you have the money for it, get the 392. I’m getting 13.3/4 MPG on my 392XR. I don’t drive it like an ape, but there are moments my right foot gets into it. Having the power on tap is such a good feeling, hearing the symphony of power from the Hemi is intoxicating.

I’d stay far away from etorque if you plan on holding onto yours. If the 392 isn’t a real consideration, I’d go 2.0T simply to avoid etorque and as others have said, it has more torque.

Gearing no matter the engine should go as follows:

31” 3.73
33” 4.10
35” 4.56
37” 4.88
39” 5.13
40”+ 5.38

Thanks for chiming in, I think your seat of the pants opinion is very valuable. I have just started to explore the 392 option and noticed in both the Jeep.com build website and the page on this website that lists the current build options, there is not an XR option package for the 392.Do you recall what was differentiated it from other 392 models ?

 

[garyji]

Not sure about the eTorque "haters". Mine has been flawless and is the best V6/Auto Trans combo I've ever driven. Totally leaves the Tacomas in the dust.

G.

 

[FloridaMan]

Thanks for chiming in, I think your seat of the pants opinion is very valuable. I have just started to explore the 392 option and noticed in both the Jeep.com build website and the page on this website that lists the current build options, there is not an XR option package for the 392.Do you recall what was differentiated it from other 392 models ?

XR is a popular option (not just on the 392), I believe it’s a parts availability issue currently, hopefully the option comes back soon. Stock 392 is 3.73 gears on 33” tires, XR is 4.56 on 35” tires, I believe there is also an extra inch of lift, has the reinforced tailgate for the spare, fender flare extenders and maybe something I’m missing. The gearing makes a big difference, I believe Jeep quoted 0-60 on the standard 392 4.5 seconds, I think it was car and driver who tested the 392 XR and got 4.0 seconds. The standard 392 should come with 4.10 gears in my humble opinion.

 

[Bocephus]

XR lift/coil height is same as non XR 392. The only height difference is 35” (on the XR) vs 33” tires.

The non XR 392 comes with Fox branded shocks, the XR does not. Everyone seems super content with either shock type.

a non XR 392 is perfect for slapping on 35s, no suspension change ups needed. I did that on mine before moving to 38s.

 

[KevinC11]

If you can afford the 392 and the gas that goes along with the ownership of it, you should get the 392. It checks every box you could ever think of asking and the driving experience is unlike anything currently on the road.

KevinC

Sponsored