I used it in the 80s. Expensive at the time. $5 a quart but synthetic which the industry said was dangerous and would cancel your warranty back then is now standard in the industry.
No engine, even the 4.0, was truly without its issues. There were a number of issues with the 3.6 early on and they are well documented. If this was a JK forum, you would hear more. By the time the JL came to market, the 3.6 had fixed its main issues. The engine is used in minivans, sports cars and pick up trucks in massive volumes. It would be much more publicized if the engine was as bad as you hint.Guess we might be talking to different mechanics then. The ones I spoke to before getting my Jeep and after told me to go with the 3.6 as they consider it to be the second best engine in a Jeep after the 4 Liter Straight 6.
I am not aware of any complaints you mentioned here on the 3.6 at least off this forum or a Google Search.
He actually wasn't a troll...gentleman seemed to be an opinionated senior citizen. He seemed knowledgeable of past CJs. So out of respect given his possible age versus mine (34) I stopped arguing with him. At first I thought he is some kid down the block who drove his mommy or daddy's CJ and then starting spewing facts of his ass. But later posts I realized that was not the case and just started letting him vent.No engine, even the 4.0, was truly without its issues. There were a number of issues with the 3.6 early on and they are well documented. If this was a JK forum, you would hear more. By the time the JL came to market, the 3.6 had fixed its main issues. The engine is used in minivans, sports cars and pick up trucks in massive volumes. It would be much more publicized if the engine was as bad as you hint.
As for carbon buildup, other than someone who never goes over 25mph, such as an on-campus bus, I doubt there is a major issue like you have hinted. As I have a 3.6, I would love for you to show us what has led you to these conclusions, as I would be interested to know if I am going to have issues. Otherwise, it sounds like a troll post, to be honest.
No, Chrysler suggest using super to remedy the problem. Contact them if you dare. Still designing a small block six cylinder to provide high torque, high horsepower and low emissions for multi use is asking a lot. I had a 4.2 liter straight 6 in my Cj7. I used synthetic oils and super unleaded gas. It was purring at 158,000 miles. CJ7 weren’t designed to travel at 70-80 miles an hour like JL Wranglers. Still most people didn’t own them because of the way they handled and functioned. They were making 200,000 CJ7 a year. You hardly saw anyone on the road with them. It’s how the Jeep wave began. It really was a small club. When the Wranglers debuts the numbers exploded. The push for more horsepower and faster vehicle created the magnificent 4.0. It’s was replaced with the sturdy 3.7 then the present 3.6. Smaller engines with higher outputs pushing a vehicle the same weight of a CJ7? I’ll stick what Chrysler has stated and use 93.No engine, even the 4.0, was truly without its issues. There were a number of issues with the 3.6 early on and they are well documented. If this was a JK forum, you would hear more. By the time the JL came to market, the 3.6 had fixed its main issues. The engine is used in minivans, sports cars and pick up trucks in massive volumes. It would be much more publicized if the engine was as bad as you hint.
As for carbon buildup, other than someone who never goes over 25mph, such as an on-campus bus, I doubt there is a major issue like you have hinted. As I have a 3.6, I would love for you to show us what has led you to these conclusions, as I would be interested to know if I am going to have issues. Otherwise, it sounds like a troll post, to be honest.
I’m 56 years old.He actually wasn't a troll...gentleman seemed to be an opinionated senior citizen. He seemed knowledgeable of past CJs. So out of respect given his possible age versus mine (34) I stopped arguing with him. At first I thought he is some kid down the block who drove his mommy or daddy's CJ and then starting spewing facts of his ass. But later posts I realized that was not the case and just started letting him vent.
None of you have the wisdom or the guts to contact Jeep Chrysler because you don’t want to be prove wrong.
Believe what you want. I got 158,000 miles out of my CJ7 using synthetic oil and super unleaded while many wrangler owners sold their off at 50K. I’m sure I’ll have mine long after you sold yours.You throw a rock into a pack of dogs and the one that gets hit, yelps the loudest.
In your paranoia, what exactly would I contact Chrysler about and how would I be proven wrong ?
Carbon build up only on Direct Injected 2.0 Turbo. 3.6 V6 is Port Injected, so the gas is sprayed on top of the valves not directly in the cylinder, thus constantly cleaning the valves of any carbon deposits.I’m hearing the issues with the 3.6 liter engine in the JL could be remedied by using super unleaded gasoline. That high build up of carbon could be the issue. Back in the day (1986) I never used anything other than super in my CJ7 and the engine ran quiet even with 158,000 miles.
Hello, Stac0608Believe what you want. I got 158,000 miles out of my CJ7 using synthetic oil and super unleaded while many wrangler owners sold their off at 50K. I’m sure I’ll have mine long after you sold yours.
The fact that your dad worked on the Connie is pretty cool. Those old radials, well any engine, were designed to run on a specific octane no? Not like it was rated for 80 and they decided to run 100LL or whatever was in service at that time.You don’t believe me? Why should I care? My dad was a mechanic back in the day. Worked on Lockheed Constellations and Electras. He told me don’t ever use 87. They put wear and tear on a engine. Fill it full of carbon. All the airlines used super octane fuels in their old piston high output engines for a reason . Today’s engines have some serious horsepower. My CJ7 4.2 liter 258 cid got 115 horsepower and 225 pounds of torque. Back in the day CJ7s did go 80 miles an hour unless you wanted a death wish. Today’s Wranglers drive more like cars than the Jeeps of my youth. A turn in today’s JL would flip a CJ.
Hello, Stac0608
I have no opinion on all this matter but you just need to go on and let whatever stupid remarks @TrailScooter come up with go in one ear and out the other.
Just a butt scooter trying to get turd off his scooter. Not worth your trouble.
The kid scooter can join his brother and Float together. Stay afloat, my friend.