What's the point of the 2.0t?

Matthew/E36

Well-Known Member
First Name
Classified
Joined
Dec 21, 2017
Messages
2,100
Reaction score
7,024
Location
StL
Vehicle(s)
Two Thousand and Eighteen Jeep Wrangler Unlimited
Not so fast; in the past few years the price of premium has risen precipitously, with the end result that at most gas stations today, premium is now a full 60 cents/gallon more expensive than regular unleaded.

So for a trip of 300 theoretical "combined" miles, according to the EPA:

3.6L: 20 MPG, so 300/20 X $2.59 (local price for regular unleaded) = $38.85
2.0T: 24 MPG, so 300/24 X $3.19 (local price for premium unleaded) = $39.88

The 2.0T would need to beat 24.6 MPG just to break even, and let's not forget the 2.0T engine will probably cost more than the 3.6L.
Also depends if you're just counting your pocket, or the environment. But I agree with the analysis you posted.





Advertisement

 

GARRIGA

Well-Known Member
First Name
Alejandro
Joined
Apr 25, 2018
Messages
704
Reaction score
424
Location
South Florida
Vehicle(s)
Dodge Durango RT
Occupation
Finance
I’m with you that the 17 was not accurate. I also idled a bit myself while messing with my Tazer, radio options, etc.

37s are on now, though, so there’s no hope of getting a realistic number from me lol. It may be accurate but it won’t be meaningful for most.
It would be meaningful for those of us going to 37. Please post.
 

CatskillsAlex

Well-Known Member
First Name
Alex
Joined
May 8, 2018
Messages
703
Reaction score
2,317
Location
Upstate NY + NYC
Vehicle(s)
2018 2-door JL Rubicon (2.0L Turbo, Sting Gray). Ordered 5/17, received 8/27.
Also depends if you're just counting your pocket, or the environment. But I agree with the analysis you posted.
Completely agree. Of course some will be quick to point that if the environment was such a high priority for us we’d be driving a Prius, not a Jeep. But from a more pragmatic standpoint, few people make a decision based on one criteria only. I’m personally looking forward to driving a vehicle that will have the 4WD capabilities I need, a style I love, and on the margin be slightly less harmful to the environment. Given the choice, this works for me! But if the 2.0L didn’t exist I’d probably still pick the JL 3.6 over any other vehicle.
 
Last edited:

Matthew/E36

Well-Known Member
First Name
Classified
Joined
Dec 21, 2017
Messages
2,100
Reaction score
7,024
Location
StL
Vehicle(s)
Two Thousand and Eighteen Jeep Wrangler Unlimited
Completely agree. Of course some will be quick to point that if the environment was such a high priority for us we’d be driving a Prius, not a Jeep. But from a more pragmatic standpoint, few people make a decision based on one criteria only. I’m personally looking forward to driving a vehicle that will have the 4WD capabilities I need, a style I love, and on the margin be slightly less harmful to the environment. Given the choice, this works for me! But if the 2.0L didn’t exist I’d probably still pick the JL 3.6 over any other vehicle.
Yeah, it's a balance for sure. I've had turbos and it wasn't an option when I ordered so it made the decision easier, haha. Who knows what I'd do if I could actually drive both though. Oh wait, I have an MT also...don't think they did the turbo manual anyway.

I mean I get just over 16 mpg anyway, so efficiency is always relative :)
 

viper88

Well-Known Member
First Name
Nick
Joined
Apr 22, 2018
Messages
3,233
Reaction score
2,976
Location
IL
Vehicle(s)
'19 JLR 2.0T
It has almost become status quo at this point for manufacturers to take an existing V6 or V8 vehicle and start offering a motor with two fewer cylinders offset by the addition of a turbo, which almost always generates substantially more torque at low RPM than the naturally aspirated motor they replaced, and often provides better fuel economy as well.

So I had high hopes for the 2.0t in the Wrangler, expecting it would offer similar benefits over the Pentastar V6.

However the reviews are in, and so far every review I've watched or read indicates the 2.0t provides less torque at low RPM than the Pentastar, or similar at best. I've seen some people write this off as "oh well it's a small displacement turbo engine, what did you expect?"... but that was par for the course 10-20 years ago. Modern turbo engines generally don't have turbo lag, and don't have to wait to spool up. And to add to that, the Wrangler 2.0t has the added benefit of a 48 volt BSG system, which would only help off idle torque that much more. Most other modern turbo powertrains on the market aren't using a BSG system yet.

So what's left? Why does the 2.0t exist? The articles I've read, including the one on the front page of this site (which I've been reading for a long time, but just now decided to register to comment), point to its expected improved fuel economy.

So you have 18/23 from the 3.6 V6 using 87 octane, right? Average the two and you get 20.5 mpg
Then you have 21/24 from the 2.0t I4 using 91+ octane. Averages out to 22.5 mpg.

Here in Memphis, looking at Gas Buddy, the best price today is $2.04 for regular, and $2.43 for premium (at Costco).

Let's say you put 20 gallons in your Wrangler's tank. That's going to cost you $40.80 for the V6, and $48.60 for the I4.
With 50/50 mixed driving, you'll get 410 miles of range in the V6 and 450 miles of range in the I4.

So in the V6 you're getting 10.05 miles per dollar.
In the I4 you're getting 9.26 miles per dollar.

So there goes the fuel economy benefit. The I4 actually has a higher fuel cost, unless people find you're able to run 87 octane in it without hurting the fuel economy much... but you're definitely going to lose some power if you do that.

Even if you drive entirely in the city, where the MPG difference is more in favor of the turbo 4, it still costs more to run the turbo.
V6 = 8.82 miles per dollar in the city
I4 = 8.64 miles per dollar in the city


I'm really struggling here. What's left. Why did they bother to put the turbo 4 in the Wrangler? Refinement? According to the reviews (and common sense based on most other small turbo motors out now), the I4 is less refined with the exception of the start/stop system, which being BSG, works more seamlessly than the ESS in the V6.

Uh... maybe reliability? Well, I don't think anyone has any data on this new turbo 4, but historically small high strung turbocharged motors aren't renowned for running hundreds of thousands of miles without issue. Add to that the complexity of BSG system (more stuff to break) and the pretty decent reputation of the Pentastar, and while we can't be sure, my money is not on the 2.0T outlasting the 3.6 on average.

The one thing I can think of that will probably be better in the 2.0t is modding. I suspect like many factory turbo motors, you'll probably be able to spend a few hundred bucks on a tune and you'll be making quite a bit more power than from the factory. Though at what risk to reliability and warranty remains to be seen.

Anyway... I'm not trying to be a pessimist here. I'm just honestly asking, what reason is there to opt for the 2.0t? Do you think Chrysler had higher hopes for its fuel economy or power and it just didn't pan out?
The 2.0 raised the mpg 20% over the 3.6 in the 2-door JL. It's not just the Wrangler. FCA has to lower it's MPG average for it's entire fleet so everything helps. Environmental Protection Agency require the fleet of new vehicles to get 36 miles per gallon in real-world driving by 2025. I think the current average is 26 mpg today? The fleet average and overseas Wrangler sales in countries where tariffs for engines larger then 2.0 are probably the main reasons for it's existence.
 
Last edited:

Sorbs

Well-Known Member
First Name
Brian & Sunny
Joined
Aug 3, 2018
Messages
521
Reaction score
953
Location
Colorado Springs
Vehicle(s)
20' Gladiator LE, 18' JLR 6-spd 2DR, 15' Hellcat Challenger
I’ve test driven the auto and have configured a manual Pentastar for that same reason. I’d much rather have the 2.0L with a stick. It’s the turbo at altitude that offers an advantage but is that advantage worth giving up the fun of a stick? Hmmm, need more data!
Got more data today. Test drove a 2.0L Sport Unlimited today. Stop/Start worked well. Acceleration was good. I’d consider it over a v6 x6 speed Rubicon if that were a choice if two were on a dealership lot. Since I will be ordering a 2019 I’ll be getting the manual.
 

56nomad56

Well-Known Member
First Name
Steve
Joined
Dec 31, 2017
Messages
131
Reaction score
167
Location
Orange County CA
Vehicle(s)
'19 JLUS Ocean Blue, '15 BMW X1, '14 BMW 435i Coupe 6MT, '11 Pathfinder 4X4, '17 Chevy Volt, '56 Chevy Nomad, '14 BMW G650GS Sertao (yes I have a problem)
Completely agree. Of course some will be quick to point that if the environment was such a high priority for us we’d be driving a Prius, not a Jeep. But from a more pragmatic standpoint, few people make a decision based on one criteria only. I’m personally looking forward to driving a vehicle that will have the 4WD capabilities I need, a style I love, and on the margin be slightly less harmful to the environment. Given the choice, this works for me! But if the 2.0L didn’t exist I’d probably still pick the JL 3.6 over any other vehicle.
Yes, inherently big boxy SUVs like Wranglers are never going to be bastions of efficiency. Looking at the big picture, MPG gains for these type of vehicles make more of an economic and environmental impact than on smaller vehicles.

For example, say you raise the combined MPG for a Wrangler from 19 to 23. That's a gain of 21%. Driving 1,000 miles would consume 9 fewer gallons with the more efficient engine.

Now take a Prius that got 42 combined, and increase it the same 4 to get 46 combined. That's only a gain of 9%, and would save 2 gallons over the same 1,000 miles driven.
 

CatskillsAlex

Well-Known Member
First Name
Alex
Joined
May 8, 2018
Messages
703
Reaction score
2,317
Location
Upstate NY + NYC
Vehicle(s)
2018 2-door JL Rubicon (2.0L Turbo, Sting Gray). Ordered 5/17, received 8/27.
Yes, inherently big boxy SUVs like Wranglers are never going to be bastions of efficiency. Looking at the big picture, MPG gains for these type of vehicles make more of an economic and environmental impact than on smaller vehicles.

For example, say you raise the combined MPG for a Wrangler from 19 to 23. That's a gain of 21%. Driving 1,000 miles would consume 9 fewer gallons with the more efficient engine.

Now take a Prius that got 42 combined, and increase it the same 4 to get 46 combined. That's only a gain of 9%, and would save 2 gallons over the same 1,000 miles driven.
Interesting point. I hadn’t thought about it that way.
 

scottedontknow

Well-Known Member
First Name
Scott
Joined
Sep 24, 2020
Messages
63
Reaction score
28
Location
PA
Vehicle(s)
89 YJ, 95 YJ, 2019 JLU x2
i mean im getting 25+ mpg on my 2.0t running 87, so for me i love the 2.0t. but also to that same statement i have friends that get 15 highway in the 3.6 and some that are getting the same in the 2.0t because they drive with a lead foot 24/7. I think the 2.0t is great for a daily driver, as i have zero intentions of lifting and off roading with this jeep (relax everyone i have a lifted YJ already). I will say if i was going to build a crawler i would indeed go with the 3.6.
 

scottedontknow

Well-Known Member
First Name
Scott
Joined
Sep 24, 2020
Messages
63
Reaction score
28
Location
PA
Vehicle(s)
89 YJ, 95 YJ, 2019 JLU x2
8F5C6B3D-33E8-4BE7-BE44-F6559CE06227.jpeg

Proof, i felt like this needed to be added to my last post. My Jeep’s minus my JLU (wife’s is in the picture)
 

Headbarcode

Well-Known Member
First Name
Mike
Joined
Aug 16, 2018
Messages
3,787
Reaction score
6,599
Location
LI, New York
Vehicle(s)
2019 JLUR Stingray 2.0 turbo
Vehicle Showcase
1
The point of the 2.0T is to be able to do this to it, and not be left with a slug. Thank you, torque!
20200813_083329.jpg
20200815_110338_resized.jpg
 

RedundanT

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 9, 2020
Messages
541
Reaction score
642
Location
So. Il
Vehicle(s)
2020 JLUR
To make tree huggers feel superior. I know I like putting on Birkenstocks when hopping in my Prius to run to Trader Joe's.
 

Advertisement




Mac Haik CDJR Georgetown
 



Advertisement
Top