What exactly is the benefit of the $1,500 V6 upgrade on a Sport S?

Archeonomy

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 28, 2020
Messages
162
Reaction score
196
Location
Marblehead, MA
Vehicle(s)
Vanderhall
I have read discussions of the Turbo vs the V6 in the past (prior to the latest 2021 engine changes / choices).

For 2021, if you want an automatic on a Sport S you can have the 2.0 Turbo, or pay $1,500 more for the V6 with eTorque.

What do you get for that?

More horsepower? Any measurable performance difference? Surely there is some definable benefit to spending more money?





Advertisement

 

SoCalWrangler

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 22, 2017
Messages
78
Reaction score
116
Location
Orange County
Vehicle(s)
JLUR 2019
Occupation
Engineer/ Real Estate Agent
Vehicle Showcase
2
Generally speaking, if you live in higher altitudes or travel there often, the 2.0 may be more beneficial due to force induction on the turbo allowing for more power.


In terms of reliability, the 3.6 outshines the 2.0 in that manner as it has been implemented in its most basic iteration since 2012 and had a slight revamp in 2014 i believe. From chargers, challengers, Ram pickups, cargo vans, minivans. its everywhere so parts are extremely easy to source for cheap.

Personally, I chose the 3.6L V6 and avoided the etorque due to the reliability factor. Most of my colleagues had overheating issues in the JLs when is was 110+ degrees outside while driving with bigger tires. the 3.6 jeeps did not have any issues in that regard. (This is a personal anecdote and does not reflect systematic issues)
 

Glamisfan

Well-Known Member
First Name
Steve
Joined
Apr 12, 2018
Messages
337
Reaction score
465
Location
SoCal, 30 minutes from Glamis
Vehicle(s)
2020 Sting-Gray JLUR
I look at it this way. They’re pushing the 2 L turbo so if you want the V6 and an automatic they penalize you $1500. I have a 2 L turbo and love it. It feels quick. I would have gotten the V-6 if it was the same price or cheaper than a 2 L. But for when they make you spend more money on the V6, Forget it. The 2L also gets better fuel mileage in the city and has more torque for off road.
 

Strommen95

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 5, 2019
Messages
873
Reaction score
1,721
Location
New York
Vehicle(s)
2019 Mojito Sport S JLU
It’s the penalty of choosing the worse fuel efficient engine. I’m a big fan of the 3.6 but with today’s prices in 2019 I would’ve bought a 2.0. It’s not worth $1000-1500 more with the auto trans(I felt similarly about the 2.0 which was $1000 more when I bought.)
 

summer4x

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 27, 2020
Messages
115
Reaction score
176
Location
Rotating Orb
Vehicle(s)
many
So the 3.6 is a $1,500 upgrade on a Sport, but on a Rubicon the 2.0 is a $1,500 upgrade? C'mon, this is silly.
 

Mfarr75

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 2, 2020
Messages
231
Reaction score
688
Location
North Carolina
Vehicle(s)
2021 JLUS
FCA simply wants more people to buy the 4 cylinder. They made a bunch of them I am sure and need to move them. FCA likely plans to phase out the 3.6 in a few years so they need to acclimate the customer to the 4 cyl turbo. Others are right that FCA wants to make you pay a fine for the 3.6 as disincentive to all but the die-hard V6 fans. Those open to a new engine, new to Jeep, or simply not very attentive to engine choice will go for the 4 on the price factor alone.

That being said, I can't beat this drum enough that folks need to be aware direct injection turbo engines like the 2.0 will develop a carbon deposit issue on backsides of the intake valves from misted oil from the crankcase vent system to the air intake. It will manifest itself as a noticible loss of performace and power. It will require a physical teardown and cleaning of the valves to 100% correct the condition. There are various sprays and such in the market that claim to clean the valves, but they only do a C+ or B- job at best.

FCA could care less about this fact because the carbon deposits won't accumulate enough to be a major problem until maybe 60K miles and up, so well outside the factory warranty mileage. On the extended warranties, FCA will just call it wear and tear and not a defect, or blame the customer somehow in order to deny the claim. 3.6 won;t have the problem because it's port injection.

So to me, that is a major factor when deciding on one engine versus another.
 
Last edited:

zrickety

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2020
Messages
426
Reaction score
481
Location
USA
Vehicle(s)
2020 Rubicon Sarge 3.6L 6MT
Occupation
Technician
folks need to be aware direct injection turbo engines like the 2.0 will develop a carbon deposit issue
This is a fact. Coming from direct injection Volkswagens, carbon buildup is a real issue. You can drive it hard (3000+ rpm for 30 min) and it will burn off most deposits, or you can pull the manifold and do walnut blasting like the BMW guys. Direct injection is great for torque and gas mileage, but the detergents never touch the valves.
That said, I test drove a 2.0 and actually liked it. But I am really glad the 3.6 still uses traditional fuel injection.
 

summer4x

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 27, 2020
Messages
115
Reaction score
176
Location
Rotating Orb
Vehicle(s)
many
That being said, I can't beat this drum enough that folks need to be aware direct injection turbo engines like the 2.0 will develop a carbon deposit issue
I'm not going to worry about it. I'd rather realize the good fuel mileage immediately, then sell the Jeep when it is approaching 100k miles. I know this isn't my trusty old Cummins diesel engine, and that's ok. I bought it for fun.
 

summer4x

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 27, 2020
Messages
115
Reaction score
176
Location
Rotating Orb
Vehicle(s)
many
Depending on your area, you may actually be paying more as the 2.0 requires premium gas and is detuned when running regular as it was not intended for regular gas. In real world driving, you wont notice a dramatic difference between the 2 when it comes to mpg. Check out fuelly to confirm

That's weird, because I saw somebody post a snapshot of the owners' manual showing that is is NOT required, only recommended. Somebody else care to chime in with facts?
 

YYCSahara

Well-Known Member
First Name
BDLL
Joined
May 3, 2019
Messages
219
Reaction score
155
Location
Calgary AB Canada
Vehicle(s)
2019 Jeep Wrangler Unlimited Sahara 2.0T
That's weird, because I saw somebody post a snapshot of the owners' manual showing that is is NOT required, only recommended. Somebody else care to chime in with facts?
Premium is not required. Owners manual comes with a printout saying engine is designed to run on regular and only if you're towing or driving in really hot conditions, would it benefit from premium. I ran some tests when I first got mine and realised using premium in it, for me, is a waste of $. So I haven't in over a year. I do live at altitude and rarely does it get over 80F here.

I know V6 owners usually said that one major benefit is avoiding the Etorque. Now Etorque is on all V6s and not on the Turbo. I wonder if that changes things at all as far as perceived reliability.
 

Mfarr75

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 2, 2020
Messages
231
Reaction score
688
Location
North Carolina
Vehicle(s)
2021 JLUS
I'm not going to worry about it. I'd rather realize the good fuel mileage immediately, then sell the Jeep when it is approaching 100k miles. I know this isn't my trusty old Cummins diesel engine, and that's ok. I bought it for fun.
That is all very true. It will be the proverbial "next guy's" problem at that point. However, I suppose once word gets out about all those 2.0's with over 100K miles and carbon deposit issues, resale values will suffer.
 

summer4x

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 27, 2020
Messages
115
Reaction score
176
Location
Rotating Orb
Vehicle(s)
many
That is all very true. It will be the proverbial "next guy's" problem at that point. However, I suppose once word gets out about all those 2.0's with over 100K miles and carbon deposit issues, resale values will suffer.
Are there actual examples of carbon deposits on these engines, or is it all just theory thus far? My BIL has a 2015 F150 with the Ecoboost and he's way over 100k and has had no problems at all.
 

Advertisement




Quadratec
 



Advertisement
Top