What's the point of the 2.0t?

thenewrick

Well-Known Member
First Name
Andrew
Joined
Nov 4, 2017
Messages
244
Reaction score
85
Location
Tallahassee
Vehicle(s)
Tesla Model S P85+ / Subaru Baja Turbo 5-Speed
Less emissions, more torque, better fuel economy, easier to tune and make big power cheaply. For the average Joe, it's probable a wash with the Pentastar.

The torque curve is important as well. You'll see that turbos produce more torque at lower RPM. This gives the feeling of stronger acceleration and more effortless acceleration off the line/daily driving.

It is a myth that the Pentastar produces 90% of its torque near idle. It's probably closer to 4000k RPM then 100% around 5500rpm. The turbo engine will probably produce more torque, and 100% of torque around 3500k rpm.
Advertisement

 
Last edited:

DanW

Well-Known Member
First Name
Dan
Joined
Mar 2, 2017
Messages
7,540
Reaction score
9,614
Location
Indiana
Vehicle(s)
18 JLUR, 08 JKUR, 15 Ford Transit 350, 04 WJ 4.7, 17 Renegade, 99 Merc E430 S
Vehicle Showcase
2
Do you have an official torque curve graph for the latest Pentastar revision or updates? I’ve been unable to find it.
No, but the previous gen had the flat torque curve I described. The new one is supposed to be something like 14% better between 1,000 and 3,000 rpm, so that's just gravy.
 

The Great Grape Ape

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2017
Messages
2,856
Reaction score
4,106
Location
Canadian Rockies
Vehicle(s)
2015 JKU AspenX 5spd , 2015 JK Sport 6spd
It is a myth that the Pentastar produces 90% of its torque near idle. It's probably closer to 4000k RPM then 100% around 5500rpm.
You’re basing that on what? You didn’t even get the MAX torque RPM correct (for old or new) and those are published numbers, sounds like a lot of mythology on your part, so why would the rest be any more of an accurate reflection of the situation?

Torque curve on the Old Pentastar shows 96% of the torque by 2K RPM, so another 4% / 10lbft for 2,800 more RPM means very little.

72D3C173-9381-44A5-876B-6AC091EB624A.jpeg 9DB971D8-385F-4C92-BAAD-F79E18E68EF7.jpeg

With the new Pentastar the benefits are for earlier power delivery (by about 300 RPM) and better fuel efficiency, so things are improved not diminished in the new PUG refresh in the JL.

http://australiancar.reviews/2016_Pentastar_V6.php

http://articles.sae.org/14322/

The torque curve is important as well. You'll see that turbos produce more torque at lower RPM. This gives the feeling of stronger acceleration and more effortless acceleration off the line/daily driving.
Turbos don’t always produce more torque down low, especially for small displacement turbos, it depends heavily on how they are tuned and what their focus is... speaking of which, look at the Ford Focus ST’s torque curve, that’s not early on, but well after 2K, and it’s also early decay, neither of which is great for power delivery or highway performance, but that’s because it’s meant for economy not performance, which may be the focus of the JL’s turbo too.

Slow building torque curve in 2.0L turbo in the Focus, max may be sooner, but it takes longer to get 75% at 2K RPM because it’s a gradual peak, not early on then flat curve.
92C47BDE-8197-42DB-A36F-A13BB9038626.jpeg


The advantage of the Pentastar is we have reference curves for the prior design, and the new one is torquier. There is no reference for this 2.0T which won’t even match Alfa numbers, so making a claim about 2.0T without removing the effects of the BSG is pretty spurious. It depends heavily on how FCA positioned the tune, and if they bult-in reliance on the BSG for down low.

Also throttle response will remain a major issue for the 2.0T as seen in the early reviews mention of lag, and only pre-charging will help reduce it, which isn’t helpful on the trail, nor is it how most people drive.

https://blog.caranddriver.com/turbo-vs-non-turbo-putting-throttle-response-to-the-test/
 

DanW

Well-Known Member
First Name
Dan
Joined
Mar 2, 2017
Messages
7,540
Reaction score
9,614
Location
Indiana
Vehicle(s)
18 JLUR, 08 JKUR, 15 Ford Transit 350, 04 WJ 4.7, 17 Renegade, 99 Merc E430 S
Vehicle Showcase
2
Thanks for posting those torque curves, Ape.

2000 rpms isn't far off idle, to me, with a manual. I'll run around in my JK today and try to time it to 2000 rpms in 1st gear. It doesn't take long. The Pentastar is just under 200lbs at only 1400 rpms, which is probably less than a second or so away from clutch engagement. Maybe I should have said right off throttle tip-in, instead of off idle. You are above idle by the time the wheels start to turn. That's all splitting hairs, though.

In terms of driveability, and I've driven it on the street, in the mud, and rock crawling, the Pentastar feels strong. Certainly stronger than the 3.8, with which I've got 120k miles experience, and which beats the Pentastar up to about 1200 rpms, which is where their curves meet.

Btw, talking torque, I've stalled off road more often with the old inline 4.0 Jeep than with my 3.8 (which has happened exactly once in 10 years, due totalliy to driver error), pulling a heavier Jeep, but I hear all the pining out there for the great torque of that 4.0. Funny. Gearing has MUCH to do with it, and the JL Rubicon will have better gearing, along with the benefits of the updated Pentastar's torque curve. The torque at the rear wheels should be night and day better, on the street and on the trail.
 

thenewrick

Well-Known Member
First Name
Andrew
Joined
Nov 4, 2017
Messages
244
Reaction score
85
Location
Tallahassee
Vehicle(s)
Tesla Model S P85+ / Subaru Baja Turbo 5-Speed
I reckon it’s a case of ill believe it when I see it. So far none of the dynos posted are actual dynos they’re just drawings. They might be based on an actual dyno test but still sketchy. Soon we’ll start seeing actual customer dynos maybe!

250 tq at 2000 rpm is impressive but believable.

I wonder what a flash tune will put the turbo motor at? Maybe 350tq at 2000 rpm?
 

DanW

Well-Known Member
First Name
Dan
Joined
Mar 2, 2017
Messages
7,540
Reaction score
9,614
Location
Indiana
Vehicle(s)
18 JLUR, 08 JKUR, 15 Ford Transit 350, 04 WJ 4.7, 17 Renegade, 99 Merc E430 S
Vehicle Showcase
2
I reckon it’s a case of ill believe it when I see it. So far none of the dynos posted are actual dynos they’re just drawings. They might be based on an actual dyno test but still sketchy. Soon we’ll start seeing actual customer dynos maybe!

250 tq at 2000 rpm is impressive but believable.

I wonder what a flash tune will put the turbo motor at? Maybe 350tq at 2000 rpm?
The updated Pentastar has been out in the Grand Cherokee for a year, so I don't see how it is sketchy. The 2.0 is the unknown, at this point, other than peak power.

I hear all this flash tune talk, and that's great, but good luck getting longevity out of it, and the warranty will be up in smoke. I'd be viewing that warranty as a real safety net with a brand new powerplant.
 

thenewrick

Well-Known Member
First Name
Andrew
Joined
Nov 4, 2017
Messages
244
Reaction score
85
Location
Tallahassee
Vehicle(s)
Tesla Model S P85+ / Subaru Baja Turbo 5-Speed
The updated Pentastar has been out in the Grand Cherokee for a year, so I don't see how it is sketchy. The 2.0 is the unknown, at this point, other than peak power.

I hear all this flash tune talk, and that's great, but good luck getting longevity out of it, and the warranty will be up in smoke. I'd be viewing that warranty as a real safety net with a brand new powerplant.

I wouldn’t get the pentastar or the 2.0 for the record. But I’m sure the reliability on both are fine. Tunes are typically pretty safe as well. I’m not a reliability kinda guy also tho. I just want max performance on the cheap and enjoy it while it lasts then get a new toy. Not putting 100’s of thousands of miles on anything.

Tune shouldn’t affect the warranty either.

But yea the turbo is a premium option. Costs more, better performance, more miles on a tank. I’m always the big engine guy myself tho. I’d totally recommend the pentastar to my mom though because it would be cheaper and easier overall.
 

rtf500

Member
First Name
Ross
Joined
Nov 19, 2017
Messages
14
Reaction score
3
Location
Orlando,FL
Vehicle(s)
Jeep Grand Cherokee altitude
I just don't understand the trepidation over turbo charged engines on this forum. I understand their new to Jeep, but good grief people, it's not a new technology. I see people complaining about reliability, "exhaust turbines" failing, having to rebuild the compressor at intervals, turbo "lag". Why not wait till their out on the road and some miles on them to judge them?

These Jeeps are so slow with the current Pentastar, why such pushback on what arguably will be a faster option?
 

rtf500

Member
First Name
Ross
Joined
Nov 19, 2017
Messages
14
Reaction score
3
Location
Orlando,FL
Vehicle(s)
Jeep Grand Cherokee altitude
Here are a few screen shots from Car and Driver and a review they did.
Screenshot_20171224-101308.png
Screenshot_20171224-102043.png
 

thenewrick

Well-Known Member
First Name
Andrew
Joined
Nov 4, 2017
Messages
244
Reaction score
85
Location
Tallahassee
Vehicle(s)
Tesla Model S P85+ / Subaru Baja Turbo 5-Speed
^Wow I was pretty much right on the money with my guesstimate! Even better that I had expected. Too bad they won't offer it with a manual transmission. Damn motor companies always putting the manual with the Mom-motor as only option. :(

As for the whole turbo hate thing; it's a deeper political/culture thing. Just pretend it doesn't exist and keep on keepin' on. :D

I want a full EV Jeep with magnetic ride/air suspension. The current JL looks to be a solid upgrade over the JK but still very much an old school SUV tech-wise.

At this point the only one I'd consider is the PHEV, or maaaaaybe the 3.0. For the time being I'm gonna rock the Baja Turbo :D. I reckon in a year or two we'll have a lot more data and a couple of minor improvements over first production models.
 

Rubi

Well-Known Member
First Name
David
Joined
Dec 25, 2016
Messages
448
Reaction score
220
Location
Connecticut
Vehicle(s)
‘18 Jeep JLR
I just don't understand the trepidation over turbo charged engines on this forum. I understand their new to Jeep, but good grief people, it's not a new technology. I see people complaining about reliability, "exhaust turbines" failing, having to rebuild the compressor at intervals, turbo "lag". Why not wait till their out on the road and some miles on them to judge them?

These Jeeps are so slow with the current Pentastar, why such pushback on what arguably will be a faster option?
Buy your 2.0; you can be one of the sacrificial lambs. If it’s a piece of sh...., so be it. If it’s the next best thing since sliced bread; so be it as well. Only time will tell.

From what I gather on all the negative threads concerning the 2.0 is; people don’t want to take a chance on an unknown BSG variable and exhaust turbines ARE notorious for not exceeding 100k miles. Go back and read my post on this thread it’s #10. This covers all the potential reasons for the lack of longevity on the 2.0.

All the preliminary performance specs concerning the 2.0 are extremely close to the tried and true 3.6. We haven’t seen an actual 2.0 torque curve yet; we have seen one for the 3.6. Another thing; it is NEW technology. Do you know of any other BSG turbo’s in existence?
 

rtf500

Member
First Name
Ross
Joined
Nov 19, 2017
Messages
14
Reaction score
3
Location
Orlando,FL
Vehicle(s)
Jeep Grand Cherokee altitude
Forced induction isn't for everyone, it sounds like you're more suited for the Pentastar. I certainly won't argue that turbocharged engines don't have the reliability that a NA does. However, I think we can all agree that from a performance enthusiast perspective, forced induction is often the preferred path. I'm sure both engines will turn out to be great in the JL.
 

Dynomite1371

Well-Known Member
First Name
Ed
Joined
Dec 13, 2017
Messages
1,425
Reaction score
2,082
Location
Maryland
Vehicle(s)
2018 JLUR, Granite, Steel bumper, Safety, Cold Weather, Tow package, Premium Alpine, Black Leather and Mopar "self draining" Mats
Occupation
Police Officer
Let's not
In 2019 or 2020 the 2.0T will replace the 3.6 as the base engine, mark ma words.
Let's not forget what the original poster left out..... It's more money! After a build price of $54,000, the last thing I needed was more $. I've put 95k on my 2012 Pentastar and love it. Quite honestly the V6 may cost more than the turbo and replacing the Pentastar may be in the future due to lower costs, which would make my V6 JLUR a comidity!! I just don't see the cost "vs" performance benifit either.
 

The Great Grape Ape

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2017
Messages
2,856
Reaction score
4,106
Location
Canadian Rockies
Vehicle(s)
2015 JKU AspenX 5spd , 2015 JK Sport 6spd
I just don't understand the trepidation over turbo charged engines on this forum.
It’s not about trepidation it’s about reality, and not guesstimates based on fair tales and dreams, while at the same time talking BS about known quantities.

Again, the Pentastar’s peak means very little when it takes more than twice as many RPM to just add 10lbft , and then just quoting the Turbos max RPM withou knowing how it acts down low is equally ignorant of power delivery. Plus RPM tells half the story of the 2.0T, the well reported turbo lag tells the other half, and that’s not good, especially when on the trails.

The people who are concerned with reliability are those who take their Wranglers into the middle of nowhere or who hold onto them for longer than a flight of fancy until their flash pops.


Why not wait till their out on the road and some miles on them to judge them?
That’s what some of us are advocating, especially those of us who are looking at the PUG+BSG, where some of what may make the 2.0T go, might get stitched into the other offering too.

These Jeeps are so slow with the current Pentastar, why such pushback on what arguably will be a faster option?
Because this is not a big deal, you’re talking a minor improvement, not a Hemi level change. We’re talking a few dozen lbft torque improvement and a few 10th of a second at best, nothing that truly is that distant from the Pentastar to begin with despite all the hype and hopes & dreams leading up to the launch. Again, this is right next to the Pentastar, not something that changes the Wrangler from ‘slow’ to ‘not slow’.
 

Rubi

Well-Known Member
First Name
David
Joined
Dec 25, 2016
Messages
448
Reaction score
220
Location
Connecticut
Vehicle(s)
‘18 Jeep JLR
Forced induction isn't for everyone, it sounds like you're more suited for the Pentastar. I certainly won't argue that turbocharged engines don't have the reliability that a NA does. However, I think we can all agree that from a performance enthusiast perspective, forced induction is often the preferred path. I'm sure both engines will turn out to be great in the JL.
It’s also about smooth power delivery. Any turbo has a spiky instantaneous power on attribute. That’s the last thing you want when you’re rock crawling. That would work just fine for people who never take it off road.
 
Advertisement

Mac Haik CDJR Georgetown
 
Advertisement
Top