Advertisement

The 2018 Jeep Wrangler JL needs a V8 option

Overland

Member
First Name
Dean
Joined
Jan 28, 2018
Messages
9
Reaction score
0
Location
Chicago
Vehicle(s)
JK
https://www.topspeed.com/cars/car-news/the-2018-jeep-wrangler-jl-needs-a-v-8-option-ar178209.html

I think that is the key reason many JK owners wouldn't upgrade to JL, there are so many advantages JK over JL, even though JL improved so many minor aspects here or there, but overall speaking, not worth to switch to JL especially those 3.6 JK owners, regardless the price hike.



Advertisement



 

BostonBilly

Well-Known Member
First Name
Billy
Joined
Dec 18, 2017
Messages
1,248
Reaction score
2,566
Location
Mass
Vehicle(s)
2015 JKU
I would have paid for the upgrade to a v8
 

zgn

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 16, 2017
Messages
771
Reaction score
410
Location
Maryland
Vehicle(s)
Wrangler TJ (2001)
With the Trump administration potentially ended the Obama-era EPA requirements it might happen. It will be interesting to see if this changes FCA's plans for Wrangler. So much was done because of these requirements.
 

kylebw7

Well-Known Member
First Name
Kyle
Joined
Mar 14, 2018
Messages
111
Reaction score
109
Location
Clemson
Vehicle(s)
Discovery, 392 Daytona, JK
I would have gladly paid for the increase for a V8. I'm going to swap in the Mopar 6.4 as soon as I'm comfortable with who is doing it. They put hemis in the Cherokee they should definitely offer it in the Wrangler. They'd sell as many as they could make. G wagen does just fine witht the 6.3 making huge power but it isn't a convertible
 

Merlin28

Banned
First Name
Peter
Joined
Feb 23, 2018
Messages
204
Reaction score
108
Location
New Jersey
Vehicle(s)
3 JK Sahara builds , JL Rubicon, 95 XJ build
With the Trump administration potentially ended the Obama-era EPA requirements it might happen. It will be interesting to see if this changes FCA's plans for Wrangler. So much was done because of these requirements.
I completely agree with this, peeps are jumping the gun on this and overlooking
This pretty big fact. Let’s see how car companies respond. There’s wayyyy too many laws governing car manufacturing these days especially emissions. Considering US is running way cleaner emissions. Look at China and India... they’re the real problem.
 

PavementWarrior

Well-Known Member
First Name
Gary
Joined
Nov 9, 2017
Messages
1,183
Reaction score
1,761
Location
Northern CA
Vehicle(s)
2018 2 door JL
https://www.topspeed.com/cars/car-news/the-2018-jeep-wrangler-jl-needs-a-v-8-option-ar178209.html

I think that is the key reason many JK owners wouldn't upgrade to JL, there are so many advantages JK over JL, even though JL improved so many minor aspects here or there, but overall speaking, not worth to switch to JL especially those 3.6 JK owners, regardless the price hike.
No reason to upgrade from a CJ to a JK (I know 2 guys with CJs that dont see any reason for anything else)

I sat in a JK, hit my head on the plastic sport bar and said, wow that would kill me in an accident or offroad. I sat in the JL and the killer plastic bump is gone, so waited for a year to buy a JL. Now I still wait for the damn 2 door to be built... sigh.

I would have done a few things different if I was JL designer for a day:
- Killed the front drop down window, front would be strong and less wind noise. (too gimicky)
- Spent that time to make killer half doors (a real open air every damn day killer feature)
- LED front lights optional on all models
- 4:11 gears would come with axle upgrade

Age of the V8 is dead, sooner they get a killer electric the better. Its coming.
 

kylebw7

Well-Known Member
First Name
Kyle
Joined
Mar 14, 2018
Messages
111
Reaction score
109
Location
Clemson
Vehicle(s)
Discovery, 392 Daytona, JK
I went ahead and picked up a 392 charger because I know the end is near for NA V8 motors. I don't care about gas mileage so I never use the feature that deactivates cylinders. I'm going to put the 392 in my JL. With the right exhaust it'll sound like (and be) and absolute monster. I'm going to run 40s at a minimum so the stock motor never was going to be kept.

I thought about going the LS route as it'd be cheaper but considering I already have a vehicle with the 392 and it's Mopar it's a no brainer
 

drogers

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2016
Messages
315
Reaction score
326
Location
Livermore CA
Vehicle(s)
F-250
The days of the VA are almost gone, I don’t think will ever see one in a wrangler from the factory. The reality is they can get more power and torque from a turbocharged 6 then we would see in a typical V8, and the turbo diesel could have more torque than either.

Look at what Ford has done with the Ecoboost line - that V6 is crazy good, nobody with one is wishing they had downgraded to the V8.

And last point - even if Trump rolls back the CAFE standards (or any other EPA program), California and he other 11 C.A.R.B. compliant states can choose to stick with them, and they’ve indicated that’s likely. We’ve seen in the past the power that C.A.R.B. has over the industry - we haven’t seen a ‘49 state’ vehicle from a manufacturer in decades.

Don’t get me wrong - I’d love to see a V8, I just don’t think it’s likely.
 

kylebw7

Well-Known Member
First Name
Kyle
Joined
Mar 14, 2018
Messages
111
Reaction score
109
Location
Clemson
Vehicle(s)
Discovery, 392 Daytona, JK
They aren't putting a turbo six in a Jeep with more than 500hp. The 6.4 is over 500 (Mopar rates it at 485 but everyone says that's for government reasons and that it is over 500). They need the 6.4 in the Wrangler from factory
 

drogers

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2016
Messages
315
Reaction score
326
Location
Livermore CA
Vehicle(s)
F-250
They aren't putting a turbo six in a Jeep with more than 500hp. The 6.4 is over 500 (Mopar rates it at 485 but everyone says that's for government reasons and that it is over 500). They need the 6.4 in the Wrangler from factory
The 6.4 in truck form in the Ram is rated at 410hp. It’s also the biggest, thirstiest, heaviest, and most expensive of the truck engines. None of that screams “Wrangler” to me.
 

kylebw7

Well-Known Member
First Name
Kyle
Joined
Mar 14, 2018
Messages
111
Reaction score
109
Location
Clemson
Vehicle(s)
Discovery, 392 Daytona, JK
The 6.4 in truck form in the Ram is rated at 410hp. It’s also the biggest, thirstiest, heaviest, and most expensive of the truck engines. None of that screams “Wrangler” to me.
The Wrangler isn't a truck even though they're making it one. It'll never be called (or able) to tow or do what a truck does so it wouldn't need to be set up like the ram. I don't care about how thirty my vehicles are and like many with Jeeps they're used as toys so many wouldn't care about that. My 392 charger has cylinder deactivation on the highway and can get decent mileage but I don't use that feature
 

That One Guy

Well-Known Member
First Name
Ryan
Joined
Feb 8, 2018
Messages
1,178
Reaction score
1,392
Location
Utah
Vehicle(s)
2004 Honda Accord coupe, V6 6-speed manual; ordered 2018 JL Sport 6MT with A/C and anti-spin. D status.
I do find it weird that Jeep refuses to add a higher output option from the marques catalog of engines. You've always been able to get a small v8 in the GC--why not not wrangler?

For some people 270hp isn't enough. The upcoming diesel will be torquey and great in the midrange but high end getupandgo will still be absent.

Maybe they'll consider cool stuff like their range of V8's, or a forced induction V6, with the CAFE standards likely to drop.
 

drogers

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2016
Messages
315
Reaction score
326
Location
Livermore CA
Vehicle(s)
F-250
The Wrangler isn't a truck even though they're making it one. It'll never be called (or able) to tow or do what a truck does so it wouldn't need to be set up like the ram. I don't care about how thirty my vehicles are and like many with Jeeps they're used as toys so many wouldn't care about that. My 392 charger has cylinder deactivation on the highway and can get decent mileage but I don't use that feature
I get it, you like the Hemi, I’m just saying that’s old thinking - the future is in hybrids, turbos, and smaller displacement. If Jeep didn’t drop a Hemi in the JK in 10 years, why would anyone expect them to do it now?

Again, I’d like to see one - I’d probably buy one in a JT if they offered it - but I just don’t think it’s gonna happen. I truly believe we are much more likely to see a HO V6 than a V8.

If Ford can get 470lbs of torque out of a 3.5l V6 with better fuel economy than the less powerful V8, then Jeep would be silly not to try that too.
 

YFD_322

Well-Known Member
First Name
Scott
Joined
Mar 16, 2017
Messages
610
Reaction score
405
Location
NY
Vehicle(s)
2017 GC, 2019 GC SRT
Agreed, the JL needs a V8 option. Even the 4.7L would be great.
 

Bearded_Dragon

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 23, 2017
Messages
931
Reaction score
970
Location
FL
Vehicle(s)
2018 Mojito! JL Rubicon
JL Trailcat would be awesome....
 

Advertisement






Advertisement




Top