Sponsored

Which Compromise to Make - 3.6L eTorque, 3.0L TD, 392

calemasters

Well-Known Member
First Name
Allen
Joined
Sep 14, 2020
Threads
64
Messages
1,244
Reaction score
1,659
Location
Springfield, Mo.
Vehicle(s)
2021 Rubicon Unlimited, & Escalade
Occupation
Retired Mechanical Engineer
I know I want a Wrangler Unlimited Rubicon, but I keep going around in circles with these engine choices. I had a JK that was lifted and on 37" tires and that was a nice way to get around off-road. I'd like to have that capability again in a JLUR, but I wish I could have that simple V6 without eTorque and ESS or the Diesel without all the emission complications and ESS, or the 392 with a 4:1 transfer case. We all know that we want to lift and put big tires on these things. With that in mind and with the choices available in 2021, which compromise would you make and why?
I am very happy with my 3.0L diesel Rubicon. I will install 35" tires soon so I will not have to change the gearing or the suspension.
Sponsored

 

frogger2020

Well-Known Member
First Name
Keith
Joined
Feb 26, 2019
Threads
9
Messages
95
Reaction score
108
Location
San Clemente, CA
Vehicle(s)
Rubicon Wrangler JL
Seems like an easy decision. Two things are impossible to get. The third is possible with a simple regearing.
 

Zandcwhite

Well-Known Member
First Name
Zach
Joined
Sep 4, 2019
Threads
10
Messages
4,249
Reaction score
7,579
Location
Patterson, ca
Vehicle(s)
2019 jlur
This plus the fact they kept the axles and suspension virtually the same makes me wonder how long it'll be before axles, tie-rods, pitman arms, and other suspension parts break apart when folks slap 35s and 37s on them and hit the trails.

I really want to be onboard with the 392, but I seriously doubt Jeep even spent six months doing actual road and trail testing with this powertrain. Doing a simple 5.7 Hemi swap in a JK never ended at just the engine.
Axle shafts will definitely be a concern, tie rods, pitman arms, etc won't see any more load than the diesel puts on them. It's typically torque that breaks shafts, and the hemi only makes ~30 ftlbs more than the diesel. High speed rollovers from bad driving and broken parts from people being throttle happy are bound to happen. Pretending it's some untested, rushed to market product is a little too "sky is falling" paranoia for me. There are thousands of 392's on the road with the same trans. There are thousands of jeeps on the road with nearly the same torque. There are dozens of hemi swapped jeeps on the road. It might be a new combination from the factory but they are all tested and proven parts that have been combined many times.
 

Xcoaste

Well-Known Member
First Name
Ben
Joined
Oct 27, 2020
Threads
3
Messages
557
Reaction score
907
Location
PA
Vehicle(s)
2021 JLUR - Past - '13 JKU, '97 TJ, '93 YJ
Posted this a few times now, but the 3.6 with eTorque has been used in the RAM for a few years now. Was named to Wards top engine choices last 2 years. I drive short distances so the diesel didn’t make sense. I did take it for a test drive though and the seat of the pants torque was fun.
 
OP
OP
Yardstick

Yardstick

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 16, 2021
Threads
11
Messages
53
Reaction score
19
Location
Arizona
Vehicle(s)
Jeep Wrangler JLURD, Tundra, 4Runner, Sprinter
That's a good point that hadn't really occurred to me for some reason. I'm 50-60 miles from a decent trail and would probably go further out to avoid the busier areas. I might do that a couple times a month. I do short drives once or twice a week but I have a vehicle that works better for that already.
 

Sponsored

392 firecrker

Member
First Name
John
Joined
Nov 23, 2020
Threads
2
Messages
10
Reaction score
5
Location
New Orleans
Vehicle(s)
2021 Wrangler JLUR
I agree and find this decision difficult as well. I ordered a 392 but the more I think about it the more I wonder if I made the right choice. The Selec-Trac instead of Rock-Trac, and a few other things, make me think that this is really for on-road use as opposed to off-road. Additionally, the requirement of 91+ octane at 10-12 mpg makes me wonder if this is such a wise choice. I also wonder about the need for such high horsepower. I get the benefit of high torque with a Jeep but how often am I going to be wringing this thing out from 60-100 on a freeway? I probably would not choose the 3.6 as I have driven the 2.0, 3.0 and 3.6 and found the 3.6 to be most lacking in seat of the pants feel (i.e., torque). If you add in that you can get a ecodiesel or 2.0 for about 10% off of MSRP and the 392 will likely be 70k+ you will likely save around 15k-20K for similarly speced vehicles (I understand it is not exactly apples to apples).

I for one am not too worried about the reliability of the diesel engine. And, in general, do not make decisions in life leaning heavily towards a risk averse position. I have read quite a bit about individual experiences thus far with the 3rd generation ecodiesel and the concerns with the 2nd generation ecodiesel. So many people on forums make spurious claims on future doom with absolute certainty, which of course is impossible. Moreover, they can never be proven wrong as once the engines reach 100k miles no one will be around to call them on it... and, they will just say that it hasn't happened yet. There were claims like this about the 3.6 and the 2.0 initially and they have not yet come to fruition. As a result, those people just change the target and keep making doomsday predictions about some other choice that they do not make.

I have gone back and forth between keeping the 392 or canceling the order and getting the ecodiesel or the 2.0. I think all are good choices and we will enjoy whatever the final decision is, I just want to make sure that it meets the vision that I have for my Jeep in the future. A daily driver, some off-roading, camping, and pulling a light off-road trailer. The problem is that the 392 sounds sooo good! :)
 

Zandcwhite

Well-Known Member
First Name
Zach
Joined
Sep 4, 2019
Threads
10
Messages
4,249
Reaction score
7,579
Location
Patterson, ca
Vehicle(s)
2019 jlur
I haven't driven a 4xe yet, but the 2.0t by itself has plenty of get up and go, even above 10k foot elevation and even on the factory 4.10 gearing and 37's. Add in the ~30 mile range in full electric mode and the extra torque of the electric motor and I might actually lean that direction. Add the $7500 tax credit and the fact that jeep is adding solar chargers on some of the major trails and it starts to get even more appealing. Of course our 2019 only has 25k miles on it so I won't be in the market for a long time.
Sponsored

 
 



Top