Turbo Engine Doesn't Justify Price?

[CantThinkOfAHandle]

Is there any reason to believe the new auto would mate better with one engine than the other, with BSG thrown into the mix?

Sponsored

 

[The Great Grape Ape]

Oh, I must have misread your post. Those were the specs of the 2L turbo. I don't think the specs of the Pentastar have changed at all. I think what's giving the Jeep better fuel economy is the 8-speed auto.

The outward specs haven’t changed with HP and torque remaining the same on the Wrangler and only getting a small boost in the GC +15HP/8lbft, but the torque curve is supppsed to have changed how the ppwer gets delivered, with quicker building torque supposedly shifting the curve about 300RPM earlier.

People talk about the peaks for torque delivery, but likely the 2.0T is slower and more gradual torque, while the 3.6L is flatter sooner. The 2.0T still benefits from the BSG off the line and should show better numbers below 1K RPM on a curve, but I suspect the Pentastar beat it between 1K-2K, and then gets beaten by the 2.0 as it pass throuh 2K and can rely more on boost.

 

[The Great Grape Ape]

Is there any reason to believe the new auto would mate better with one engine than the other, with BSG thrown into the mix?

Not really, especially as the BSG will be offered on both within about 9 months.

 

[CantThinkOfAHandle]

Not really, especially as the BSG will be offered on both within about 9 months.

That's known? FCA is committed to maintaining the Pentastar?

 

[The Great Grape Ape]

That's known? FCA is committed to maintaining the Pentastar?

That’s in the production schedule posted here.

The commitment to the Pentastar is still pretty high especially after all the effort for the PUG refresh. It’ll stick around until a true replacement can be found for it, which the 2.0T can’t do without years of proven performance, especially in platforms like the RAM.

The 2.0T is already slated for the Cherokee, and will likely make it to pedestrian vehicles, and probably be seen in the Dodge muscle group to have something to compete with the EcoBust, but those might also get Pentastar+BSG as well, so it’s not necessarily an either/or.

There are a lot of other engines in the FCA stables in the 4cyl and 8cyl lineup that are more likely to go before the Pentastar. What the Wrangler keeps will depend on how well the engines (including the Ecodiesel) sell & perform.

 

[Jeepster2018]

Thought they said they would rather have the diesel?

For what it's worth TFL mentioned they'd rather have the 2.0L but they only tested it for a few hours offroad with a Rubicon.

 

[Bearded_Dragon]

Thought they said they would rather have the diesel?

This was between 3.6 and 2.0, diesel is not available for another year (at least).

 

[RedTRex]

The outward specs haven’t changed with HP and torque remaining the same on the Wrangler and only getting a small boost in the GC +15HP/8lbft, but the torque curve is supppsed to have changed how the ppwer gets delivered, with quicker building torque supposedly shifting the curve about 300RPM earlier.

People talk about the peaks for torque delivery, but likely the 2.0T is slower and more gradual torque, while the 3.6L is flatter sooner. The 2.0T still benefits from the BSG off the line and should show better numbers below 1K RPM on a curve, but I suspect the Pentastar beat it between 1K-2K, and then gets beaten by the 2.0 as it pass throuh 2K and can rely more on boost.

The 2.0 is a perfect fit for the Sahara Mal Crawler crowd and seems like almost every manufacture is stuffing a 2.0 turbo in their vehicles as the main engine option today. e.g. - Honda Accord, Lexus across the board, Lincoln, to name a few

 

[Jeepster2018]

Correct, they were referencing the diesel as their deisel as their pick with the Rubicon at the very closing.

I cannot begin to imagine the price for the diesel engine.

This was between 3.6 and 2.0, diesel is not available for another year (at least).

 

[Jeepster2018]

The turbo is being offered, too offer more choices and broaden the appeal of the JL.

Someone who is considering an Accord or Camry wouldn't even think of a Wrangler and vice versa when shopping.

The 2.0 is a perfect fit for the Sahara Mal Crawler crowd and seems like almost every manufacture is stuffing a 2.0 turbo in their vehicles as the main engine option today. e.g. - Honda Accord, Lexus across the board, Lincoln, to name a few

 

[Jeepster2018]

Unfortunately don’t think the diesel is going to be cost effective.

This was between 3.6 and 2.0, diesel is not available for another year (at least).

 

[Bearded_Dragon]

Unfortunately don’t think the diesel is going to be cost effective.

I don't give a damn about cost effectiveness, I want a strong engine. If there was a Hellcat Wrangler from the factory I'd order that lol.

 

[Jeepster2018]

Go for it!

I don't give a damn about cost effectiveness, I want a strong engine. If there was a Hellcat Wrangler from the factory I'd order that lol.

 

[BaldEagle]

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.

Agreed

 

[BaldEagle]

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 2.0 is more like a sports car the 3.6 seems to fits like a glove less maintenance just a opinion

Sponsored