Turbo Engine Doesn't Justify Price?

[Jeepster2018]

Looking at the 2 door Rubi with auto. Initially, was set on the Turbo engine over the V6, but after comparing the expected price and mpg difference, doesn't seem worth it. Also Turbo maintenance costs.

Sponsored

 

[YFD_322]

What's the turbo cost?

 

[Jeepster2018]

Believe I saw it as $1400?

Unless there ends up being no difference in price, the cost seems hard to justify.

 

[YFD_322]

That's not bad if you really think about it. At the point of loading up a Rubicon, another $1400 is not gonna make or break us, and I think the turbo is a nice add especially for a 2 dr

 

[Jeepster2018]

But with the minimal difference in miles per gallon, what does it really offer? An addition depending on how long you plan on keeping the vehicle a turbo can be costly maintenance down the road. Seems like the V6 is still the better value. I guess with that price I'm still trying to figure out what is the purpose of the turbo?

That's not bad if you really think about it. At the point of loading up a Rubicon, another $1400 is not gonna make or break us, and I think the turbo is a nice add especially for a 2 dr

 

[Vegas_Sirk]

I'm willing to bet that once the more long term reviews are out that a lot of people will prefer the Turbo motor when it comes to drivability. Already the reviews I have seen have been very positive for the Turbo 4. With that said $1,400 isnt that much of price difference IMO.

 

[YFD_322]

To me, the torque and the possibility of tuning is worth it to me. I've had a couple turbos and never had any trouble. I've also owned a hellcat, scat pak, over 6 gt500s and a gt350 and one of the best/fun cars I've ever owned was a Turbo WRX. And mine will be a DD, no rock crawling for me.

 

[Rubi]

But with the minimal difference in miles per gallon, what does it really offer? An addition depending on how long you plan on keeping the vehicle a turbo can be costly maintenance down the road. Seems like the V6 is still the better value. I guess with that price I'm still trying to figure out what is the purpose of the turbo?

Plus $2k for the auto tranny.

 

[simpleJL]

I'm mainly disappointed with the rumored 21/24 mpg for the 2.0. And that MPG would be assumed to be on 91 octane gas. It costs more to drive the 2.0 per mile than the V6.

Seems like such a tiny difference in fuel economy compared to the V6. Also, the 2.0 includes a mild-hybrid system and it still doesn't increase but 1 highway MPG.

It just goes to show how much the 2.0 struggles to push the Jeep around. It'll be boosting almost always.

 

[swozey]

Were the turbo specs released? Last I saw was 368hp but I doubt that's right, maybe the tq.

One great thing about turbos is you can usually add 30-50hp to them with a $700-1000 tuner.

 

[Rubi]

3.6: smooth as cream power delivery; sounds like an internal combustion engine that it is.

2.0: peaky, hyper, abrupt power delivery; sounds like a high performance sewing machine.

Which one do you prefer for reliable rock crawling?

 

[Jeepster2018]

Agree. If the gas mileage was in the upper 20s then I could justify it but given the minimal difference I still just don’t see the benefit in relation to the cost of the engine itself in addition to the required maintenance of the engine.

I'm mainly disappointed with the rumored 21/24 mpg for the 2.0. And that MPG would be assumed to be on 91 octane gas. It costs more to drive the 2.0 per mile than the V6.

Seems like such a tiny difference in fuel economy compared to the V6. Also, the 2.0 includes a mild-hybrid system and it still doesn't increase but 1 highway MPG.

It just goes to show how much the 2.0 struggles to push the Jeep around. It'll be boosting almost always.

 

[Jeepster2018]

Turbo lag is no fun....

Here are some comments from Lurvis33 in another thread..

“Please feel free to check my math but I think the 3.6L Auto is actually still the more efficient engine over the 2.0L...

So based on my local gas station (Lewisville, TX) it’s
$2.23 for 87 Octane (What the 3.6L needs) and
$2.89 for 91 Octane (What the 2.0L needs)

Let’s say we use 20 gallons of the 21.5 gallon tank that the 4 door has.
3.6L: 20 gallons X $2.23 = $44.60 per tank refill
2.0L: 20 gallons X $2.89 = $57.80 per tank refill

Well the 2.0L gets better gas mileage you say (Which it does)….
3.6L: 18/23 = 20.5 mpg avg
2.0L: 21/24 = 22.5 mpg avg

So how many miles does each engine get you?
3.6L: 20.5 mpg X 20 gal = 410 miles
2.0L: 22.5 mpg X 20 gal = 450 miles

So basically you get 40 miles more for $13.20 more. If you fill up every 2 weeks that’s 26 fill ups in a year. It will ultimately give you 1,040 more miles but also cost you about $343.20 (gas prices will fluctuate as well) more a year to drive the 2.0L over the V6. I love the idea of all that the 2.0L has to offer but when you factor in all of the things that could break on the 2.0L Turbo (Mild Hybrid) I’m starting to lean back towards the proven V6. What are y'all thinking?”

3.6: smooth as cream power delivery; sounds like an internal combustion engine that it is.

2.0: peaky, hyper, abrupt power delivery; sounds like a high performance sewing machine.

Which one do you prefer for reliable rock crawling?

 

[The Great Grape Ape]

Were the turbo specs released? Last I saw was 368hp but I doubt that's right, maybe the tq.

Turbo specs released at launch 268HP as expected (although that’s supposedly a combined number for 2.0+BSG), torque is 295lbft.

 

[digitalbliss]

Believe I saw it as $1400?

Unless there ends up being no difference in price, the cost seems hard to justify.

Where did you see this?

Sponsored