With the 4xe gone, should eTorque return?

[2nd 392]

Sure, those that have it seem to like it. So if it’s a line item option equally priced with equal availability for all trims and both base engines offer it, choice is good. … But Stella has a tendency to screw with all the aforementioned. Off the top of my head, ie transmission pricing, SOT pricing, option availability and or pricing or included package upgrades for the same price on different trims.

Sponsored

 

[Deleted User 38384]

Now we just need someone to create a poll about cafe laws being gone, bring back the EcoDiesel?



Significantly less explody than the 4xe,
Better fuel economy than all of the other engine options,
No more recalls than any other "reliable" engine on the market,
Did I mention it doesn't explode?

I would be okay with a Cummins Wrangler.

 

[whitechocolate]

fuck yeah, 6 with eTorque is fuckin awesome. Smooth shifts between on an off, the ZF8 is brilliant alongside and that extra torque from a dead stop is a hoot

 

[GMX]

My 2019 Rubicon 2.0 with e torque and heavy battery underneath consistently got MPG's in the low 20's and felt quicker off the line.
MY 2024 Sahara 2.0 with stop start and the smallish extra motorcycle battery only manages 19 mpg and the stop start feature is annoying. Glad that is going away.

 

[Pape]

While e-torque is most of the time nice except some time the regenerative breaking introduce jerkiness, I still voted no as in a world where there is incentive for start/stop, yes, but in a world where there is no incentive for one, hell no.

 

[Terrymo]

I have the 3.6 etorque. I’d prefer a bigger main 12 volt battery with no secondary battery and no stop start system.

 

[BigRedRidinHood]

I had a 3.6 JK a few years ago and now have a 3.6 JLUR with eTorque. The difference in power is huge, especially at a stoplight or going up a sand dune. It adds 90 ft lbs of torque vs non etorque motor. I was surprised to see another forum member on this thread that had a problem with the eTorque system. I believe that most of the system's components are warrantied for 8 Yeats and 100,000 miles due to it being regulated for emissions durability. The system that replaced it with the large battery and the small aux battery is a terrible idea. It puts the burden on the owner when a failure occurs after three years.,

 

[Zandcwhite]

On the 2.0, it does have benefits. Zero turbo lag, just punchy power right off the line. And 1 mpg better. And never concerning one's self about start/stop.

For the 3.6, the benefits were less obvious. People who have owned both still seem to prefer the eTorque though.

My thinking is they had the right plan from the start - put it on the 2.0, but leave it off the v6 for the KISS crowd. Everyone's happy.

The BSG is only engaged for like half of a rotatation from what I've read. That .001 of a second of turbo lag it could help with is placebo at best. Driving my wife's 3.6L etorque and then my 3.6L gladiator back to back there's literally 0 discernible difference in take offs or shifting. The ESS was slightly smoother but both are shut off anyway.

 

[Terrymo]

The BSG is only engaged for like half of a rotatation from what I've read. That .001 of a second of turbo lag it could help with is placebo at best. Driving my wife's 3.6L etorque and then my 3.6L gladiator back to back there's literally 0 discernible difference in take offs or shifting. The ESS was slightly smoother but both are shut off anyway.

Agreed I have the 3.6 etorque and I suspect most of the reported feelings of increased power are wishful thinking. Jeep engineers that developed the system say the torque is only half a rotation. I think it supposedly smooths out takeoff but I got annoyed with ESS and turned it off as well.

 

[Boatbuilder88]

I voted yes for both just in case the EPA does not remove any ESS mandate. If we have to continue to suffer with this system, then eTorque is infinitesimally better than the AUX battery disaster.

Hopefuly with the realization that the green climate story being a fairy tale and these mandates can be eliminated altogether, then I wholeheartedly agree to rip both systems out of the design.

Keep it simple, stupid...
Jay

What ESS mandate?

 

[Tortolabob]

I have a 2023 JLUR 3.6 torque that I purchased so I didn't have to deal with the two battery system I had on a previously purchased JL which was a real pita when small battery needed to be replaced. Very pleased after 3 years trouble free.

 

[The Last Cowboy]

I have the 3.6 etorque. I’d prefer a bigger main 12 volt battery with no secondary battery and no stop start system.

That's exactly what I did to mine after the second set of batteries died last month. Aux battery was removed, and the wiring to it. I rerouted the main power cables at the N1-N2 terminal, no turning back.

 

[gato]

You do know that Stellantis themselves killed off eTorque even before this administration was elected, right?

They killed it because it was total junk - a half assed poorly engineered solution to be able to market some sort of electrification.

It's amazing how people who bought into dead end technology delude themselves into thinking it was good and should return.

Who the heck wants an off-roader with a bunch batteries and cooling lines running on the outside of the vehicle exposed to off road obstacles?

All proper hybrids, even on road going vehicles, have the batteries inside and/or protected. The eTorque is probably the single worse design of an off-road hybrid system possible.

 

[Zandcwhite]

My 2019 Rubicon 2.0 with e torque and heavy battery underneath consistently got MPG's in the low 20's and felt quicker off the line.
MY 2024 Sahara 2.0 with stop start and the smallish extra motorcycle battery only manages 19 mpg and the stop start feature is annoying. Glad that is going away.

Couldn't possibly feel quicker off the line because the rubicon has 4.10s and the sahara has 3.45...
If we are going to compare etorque vs no etorque they should probably be comparable models?

 

[Old Dogger]

File thirteen for the both of them.

Sponsored