Which engine for Colorado passes?

[El Jefe]

I live in CO at about 5500' & wheel Imogene pass regularly (13,114), including high speed up I70 / Eisenhower pass. If you're unloaded w/ stock tires, any engine is fine. If you're loaded & have larger tires, you'll appreciate the turbo a lot. Or, maybe the 392

Sponsored

 

[Rodeoflyer]

I've driven my truck (6.4l gas) a lot at sea level and to tell you the truth never noticed the 80hp loss at 6000ft. I guess it's there..people swear it. Guess I'd have to dyno it.

Maybe you just get used to it on the drive back up to 6000? Who knows.

 

[Shannon]

Hello. New member here.

I'm going to buy a Wrangler that I'll use in Colorado some. I've searched and can't find any engine recommendation for engine at high altitude. Can anyone provide some insight?

I would stay away from the 2.0 turbo. Check the other threads. There are multiple complaints, mostly on high altitude passes of the battery charge light coming on and eventual shut down and stranding.. This has happened to me several times, and many others. The dealers are clueless and Jeep Cares, etc have no fix. Jeep has refused to recognize this issue. Love Jeeps but I am very disappointed in my JLUR considering what I bought it for.

 

[Wkaz]

Thanks everyone for the quick replies. I think I'll go with the 2.0 turbo. It'll save a bit of money and will likely perform just as well.

Small rental SUV's really struggle over some of the paved passes. I just didn't want something that has to run close to redline to get over the passes at a descent speed.

I had a rental turbo. Performed flawless above 10000 ft. Liked it so much when I got home bought the turbo.

 

[jason0341]

I would stay away from the 2.0 turbo. Check the other threads. There are multiple complaints, mostly on high altitude passes of the battery charge light coming on and eventual shut down and stranding.. This has happened to me several times, and many others. The dealers are clueless and Jeep Cares, etc have no fix. Jeep has refused to recognize this issue. Love Jeeps but I am very disappointed in my JLUR considering what I bought it for.

*2.0 with Etorque*

I’m actually curious about all those getting the 3.6 w/Etorque now.

 

[JeepinJason33]

*2.0 with Etorque*

I’m actually curious about all those getting the 3.6 w/Etorque now.

I drove both at altitude and went with the 3.6 w/eTorque. I honestly did not notice as much of a difference as everyone else is mentioning. I have had good luck with the 3.6 in the grand cherokee and will upgrade the intake and exhaust to get a deeper note and better breathing. The 2.0 sounded like a ricer to me.

 

[rickinAZ]

Not quite sure where the power-loss skepticism is coming from. This is basic, well-established science. Watch a candle's flame, sealed in a container, dim, flicker, and go out as the oxygen thins and is then used up. You normally-aspirated Jeepers ARE losing 3% per 1,000 feet of altitude above sea level - just like every other internal combustion engine on earth.

But there is an upside to this phenomenon. It works both ways. Drive in Death Valley and you'll gain almost 1% for the 282 feet below sea level due to "thicker" air. Hell...that's more power gained than from a CAI.

 

[Rodeoflyer]

Ugh...modern fuel-injected cars use computerized engine-management systems that automatically adjust for changing altitudes.

If this were 20 years ago, and your car had a carburetor, then you would need to have the carburetor adjusted to let in less fuel because the air is thinner at higher altitudes but the computer does all that now - using electronic sensors to continuously measure the combustion gasses and then adjust the gasoline/air mixture as necessary.

 

[jason0341]

I drove both at altitude and went with the 3.6 w/eTorque. I honestly did not notice as much of a difference as everyone else is mentioning. I have had good luck with the 3.6 in the grand cherokee and will upgrade the intake and exhaust to get a deeper note and better breathing. The 2.0 sounded like a ricer to me.

Ok that’s fine. I was referring to the person saying turbos had issue offroad at high altitudes. I was letting him know that’s with the 2.0 etorque and not the 2.0. I own a 2.0 without etorque and love it. I was curious if the 3.6 with etorque will have issues offroad at high altitude like the 2.0 with etorque.

 

[rickinAZ]

Ugh...modern fuel-injected cars use computerized engine-management systems that automatically adjust for changing altitudes.

They do. Just not in the way you think. Bottom line: fuel injection cannot create oxygen.

 

[Rodeoflyer]

It doesn't create oxygen.. it adjusts the mixture for less oxygen (to a certain extent of course).

 

[Geos7812]

It doesn't create oxygen.. it adjusts the mixture for less oxygen (to a certain extent of course).

Yep. By injecting less fuel. Less fuel = less power.

 

[Rodeoflyer]

yep. we're above that 'certain extent'

 

[rickinAZ]

Yep. By injecting less fuel. Less fuel = less power.

Exactly. It's akin to trying to explain that the world is round to a flat-Earther. Except...I think he is just having us on.

 

[Rodeoflyer]

Like forcing air into that candle jar lol. I'm just having fun.

Sponsored