Worth the wait!

[Joe]

When the blown Mustang Cobras came out (03?), they didn't feel anywhere near as fast as they where. Not sure if this is the same or what.

Sponsored

 

[GoldenSky]

There are no Turbo wranglers at dealers currently where did you test this?

 

[JFW]

I've decided to wait for the 2.0t from the very beginning, however all the issues occured and poor quality control on the 3.6s are driving me hesitated

 

[GoldenSky]

Will it be a lot different than the cherokee 2.0t with the same hp and torque rating? I drove one today and was not impressed at all. It felt like it had no power.

Yes I know, and the torque wasn't there. I specifically looked for an asked about an eco mode, and supposedly there isnt one on the cherokee.

All I can do is relay my experience. Hopefully the wrangler is different. I'm not willing to risk it at this point. I've driven two cars with that engine, both were gutless. Maybe the wrangler version is better. Hopefully it is. That's all I can say.

You're trolling hard because everything your saying is going against professional testers and dyno numbers.

 

[kre62]

You're trolling hard because everything your saying is going against professional testers and dyno numbers.

Youre not reading very well. I never said I tested a 2.0t Wrangler. Not once did I say that. I said I tested a Stelvio and a Cherokee. My statement was, and still is, that I hope the Wrangler 2.0t is a lot different than the engines in those two cars. The reviewers gushing over the 2.0t would suggest it is, but then again reviewers gushed over The Last Jedi too.

 

[Warpath]

reviewers gushed over The Last Jedi too.

:cwl: I agree, it was a terrible movie. Way more hope for this engine and its potential.

 

[Glamisfan]

I test drove the 2.0 turbo Cherokee at my local dealer and it instantly put a huge smile on my face! That motor screams! It was front wheel drive and it had a lot of torque steer. That’s not fun, but in the wrangler it’s gonna be fun!

 

[kre62]

I test drove the 2.0 turbo Cherokee at my local dealer and it instantly put a huge smile on my face! That motor screams! It was front wheel drive and it had a lot of torque steer. That’s not fun, but in the wrangler it’s gonna be fun!

Heres Car and Drivers take on it:

"Jeep claims that the 2.0-liter performs better than the V-6—a claim that its huge torque advantage and shorter final-drive ratio tend to support—but we can’t confirm that until we get one to our test track. Based on its internal testing, Jeep asserts that the turbo four will hold an 0.5-second advantage over the six from zero to 60 mph; the best time we’ve recorded was 6.9 seconds in a V-6 Cherokee Limited 4x4. The turbo engine’s general lack of character, occasionally laggy response, and slight towing disadvantage (4000 pounds versus 4500 for the V-6) mean that whatever performance and fuel-economy advantages the turbo four has over the six had better be considerable."

https://www.caranddriver.com/jeep/cherokee

CD estimating a roughly 6.5sec 0-60. They tested the JL Sahara at 6.8 which suggests the Rubicon would be around 6.6 or so. Seems to back up one reviewers comment that the two engines felt identical in speed.

 

[Joe]

Heres Car and Drivers take on it:

"Jeep claims that the 2.0-liter performs better than the V-6—a claim that its huge torque advantage and shorter final-drive ratio tend to support—but we can’t confirm that until we get one to our test track. Based on its internal testing, Jeep asserts that the turbo four will hold an 0.5-second advantage over the six from zero to 60 mph; the best time we’ve recorded was 6.9 seconds in a V-6 Cherokee Limited 4x4. The turbo engine’s general lack of character, occasionally laggy response, and slight towing disadvantage (4000 pounds versus 4500 for the V-6) mean that whatever performance and fuel-economy advantages the turbo four has over the six had better be considerable."

https://www.caranddriver.com/jeep/cherokee

CD estimating a roughly 6.5sec 0-60. They tested the JL Sahara at 6.8 which suggests the Rubicon would be around 6.6 or so. Seems to back up one reviewers comment that the two engines felt identical in speed.

If you read the entire article, they didn’t do a full test and even sound like they may not have even really driven the turbo. There are many more positive reviews of the 2.0, short or not, which are in the Wrangler...not the Cherokee....and they said good things. If you don’t want a turbo, that’s your choice. Think we’re done with this dead horse.

 

[kre62]

Just sharing my experience so people set their expectations accordingly. This will probably not feel like a rocket sled like BMWs 2 liter turbos.

 

[JLU_rubi18!]

Just sharing my experience so people set their expectations accordingly. This will probably not feel like a rocket sled like BMWs 2 liter turbos.

I do t think anyone buying a wrangler is expecting a rocket sled out of 4300-4500lb vehicle with body on frame design. That being said, I’ve spoken with people who have many years in the last JK equipped with the 3.6 and 5spd auto, as well as a few thousand miles in the new 3.6 with 8 spdauto. To a man they all said the 2.0 feels significantly faster and that it’s a pleasure to drive. They all said I would be extremely pleased with it.

I’m not expecting a rev out, high RPM engine. I’m expecting exactly what this is advertised as, which is a small displacement turbo motor that makes its horsepower & torque at a lower RPM and On a flatter curve. The driveability both on and off-road should be substantially better and different from the 3.6.

 

[kre62]

I do t think anyone buying a wrangler is expecting a rocket sled out of 4300-4500lb vehicle with body on frame design. That being said, I’ve spoken with people who have many years in the last JK equipped with the 3.6 and 5spd auto, as well as a few thousand miles in the new 3.6 with 8 spdauto. To a man they all said the 2.0 feels significantly faster and that it’s a pleasure to drive. They all said I would be extremely pleased with it.

I’m not expecting a rev out, high RPM engine. I’m expecting exactly what this is advertised as, which is a small displacement turbo motor that makes its horsepower & torque at a lower RPM and On a flatter curve. The driveability both on and off-road should be substantially better and different from the 3.6.

Excited to see some real world testing and hear about peoples experience with the new engine when it comes out.

 

[badtux]

Youre not reading very well. I never said I tested a 2.0t Wrangler. Not once did I say that. I said I tested a Stelvio and a Cherokee.

Neither of which have the BSG, which provides most of the low end off the line torque on the 2.0t Wrangler. You might as well say you tested a Ford Pinto for all the applicability it has to the 2.0t Wrangler.

 

[kre62]

Neither of which have the BSG, which provides most of the low end off the line torque on the 2.0t Wrangler. You might as well say you tested a Ford Pinto for all the applicability it has to the 2.0t Wrangler.

I dont think I'd go that far. It is the same exact engine, just doesn't have the 70 ft/lb torque fill at idle. That goes away above about 2000 rpm. At no RPM did that engine feel powerful to me.

 

[Glamisfan]

Just sharing my experience so people set their expectations accordingly. This will probably not feel like a rocket sled like BMWs 2 liter turbos.

That BMW 2 liter has 241 hp and 258 torque, quite a bit less then 268/295 that the Jeep will have. The Jeep weights 800-1000 lbs more. So as fast as a BMW, no. But still should be peppy like the Cherokee that I test drove.

Sponsored