3.8 vs. 3.6 - Page 2 - Jeep Wrangler Forum
Jeep Wrangler Forum

Go Back   Jeep Wrangler Forum > JK Jeep Wrangler Forum > JK General Discussion Forum

Join Wrangler Forum Today


Reply
 
Thread Tools

Please support our sponsors and let them know you heard about them on WranglerForum.com
Old 11-12-2011, 10:14 PM   #31
MallCrawler

WF Supporting Member
::WF Moderator::
 
kjeeper10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 37,198
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffC
I debated between the '11 and '12 JKU. I ended up getting the '11.
As far as the engine performance goes...I just think my '11 is more sluggish due to all the extra money in savings I am hauling around
Forget this

kjeeper10 is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 11-12-2011, 10:32 PM   #32
Jeeper

WF Supporting Member
 
kbwwolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 12,179
Quote:
Originally Posted by rics1997 View Post
The 3.8 wasn't just a minivan motor, it started in the New Yorker but since it was a very good motor at the time, they ended up using it in the Minivan. Being a good motor they used it in the minivan for years. Not to mention the 3.6L came out in the Minivan before the Wrangler also, so why not call it a minivan motor too?

The biggest issue with the 3.8 in the Wrangler was it wasn't matched correctly with its transmission to gears. If the manual would have came stock with 3.73 and the manual with 4.10 with the Rubi having 4.88 from stock, there would have been far less complaints.

Once you regear the 3.8L JKU, it is like driving a different vehicle.


One of the better takes on the 3.6 vs 3.8 debate that I've heard.

Personally, I'm kinda tired about hearing how "great" the 3.6 engine is. Yes, it's more efficient. And it's got more hp, which manifests itself mostly at the top end. Then again, the 3.8 is thoroughly de-bugged.

All of which is largely a moot point, since the vast majority of people on this (and other) Jeep forums are going to add tires/rims/lift/heavy-ass bumpers, etc.

With the Pentastar, you'll only have to go to 4.56 or 4.88 gears after those mods, as opposed to maybe 5.13's with the 3.8L. Either way it's gonna cost around $1.5K to make the engine perform the way you want it to.

If I couldn't have afforded a '12, I would've been absolutely satisfied with an '11. Last time I checked, they're both Jeeps.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kjeeper10 View Post
The one thing I don't understand is why people complain about merging or highway passing. Yes I do have a manual and not the auto but merging or passing I have no issues. From a dead stop first gear is very quick and shifting takes some time off also. 2 into 3rd is fine and away I go. My Jk is a lot better then my Tj was on the highway.
So 20-60 is fine. 0-20 could use some help
and from what I see the 3.6 is no better
It's not. Before buying, I drove both.

Originally I planned on buying an '11, but they couldn't find one for me in the color I wanted, with the options I wanted. So I ended up ordering a '12. Both are pretty feeble off the line.

Zero to 20 in both is like starting out on a moped. The only difference I saw in my test drives was on the freeway. The '12 has more oomph on the top end.

__________________


"What we see depends mainly on what we look for."
—John Lubbock
kbwwolf is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 11-12-2011, 11:10 PM   #33
Jeeper
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by kjeeper10 View Post
The one thing I don't understand is why people complain about merging or highway passing. Yes I do have a manual and not the auto but merging or passing I have no issues. From a dead stop first gear is very quick and shifting takes some time off also. 2 into 3rd is fine and away I go. My Jk is a lot better then my Tj was on the highway.
So 20-60 is fine. 0-20 could use some help
and from what I see the 3.6 is no better
3.6 is no better but for the fact that it is significantly more powerful and efficient. No one is saying that the 3.8 can't merge onto a highway, but, having owned both, the 3.6 is much better at it.
Black2012 is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 11-12-2011, 11:17 PM   #34
MallCrawler

WF Supporting Member
::WF Moderator::
 
kjeeper10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 37,198
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbwwolf



One of the better takes on the 3.6 vs 3.8 debate that I've heard.

Personally, I'm kinda tired about hearing how "great" the 3.6 engine is. Yes, it's more efficient. And it's got more hp, which manifests itself mostly at the top end. Then again, the 3.8 is thoroughly de-bugged.

All of which is largely a moot point, since the vast majority of people on this (and other) Jeep forums are going to add tires/rims/lift/heavy-ass bumpers, etc.

With the Pentastar, you'll only have to go to 4.56 or 4.88 gears after those mods, as opposed to maybe 5.13's with the 3.8L. Either way it's gonna cost around $1.5K to make the engine perform the way you want it to.

If I couldn't have afforded a '12, I would've been absolutely satisfied with an '11. Last time I checked, they're both Jeeps.

It's not. Before buying, I drove both.

Originally I planned on buying an '11, but they couldn't find one for me in the color I wanted, with the options I wanted. So I ended up ordering a '12. Both are pretty feeble off the line.

Zero to 20 in both is like starting out on a moped. The only difference I saw in my test drives was on the freeway. The '12 has more oomph on the top end.
Good stuff.

You need first gear to accelerate quick from a stop but our 6 speed first is very low, and with longer shifts just shifting from 1-2nd takes some time. I hate it that's why I start in 2nd. With
The rubi 4.10's it does fine--no slipping, matter of fact if pulls itself along fine no gas in 2nd. That's the only complaint I have and it's no different with the 3.6.

Not many folks have done 4.88 with stock 32's in the 3.8. Assuming 1st would be non existent. And with the argument that regearing a 6 speed is pointless unless your doing so to bring back lost performance from bigger tires :clueless:

Auto no question REGEAR it :

Wow this is dead horse material
kjeeper10 is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 11-12-2011, 11:20 PM   #35
MallCrawler

WF Supporting Member
::WF Moderator::
 
kjeeper10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 37,198
Quote:
Originally Posted by Black2012

3.6 is no better but for the fact that it is significantly more powerful and efficient. No one is saying that the 3.8 can't merge onto a highway, but, having owned both, the 3.6 is much better at it.
The automatics drivers do
kjeeper10 is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 11-12-2011, 11:34 PM   #36
MallCrawler

WF Supporting Member
::WF Moderator::
 
kjeeper10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 37,198
kjeeper10 is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 11-12-2011, 11:41 PM   #37
Jeeper
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Ohio
Posts: 1,251
KbwWolf apparently hasn't spent much time behind the wheel in both. I have an '08, '10, and '12. The '12 is decent off the line and passes reasonably well at 70 (w/4.10 and stock 32's). The 12's driveline is quite refined compared to it's 3.8/4sp bretheren. You can regear a 3.8 and make it better than a stock config off the line, but the higher horsepower of the 3.6 is very noticeable at highway speeds. I've logged almost 15K miles on JK'st in the last 6 months, that doesn't count the 2500 miles wheeling an '06 Rubicon in September.
__________________
'14 Anvil JKUR (sold the '12 at 52K miles)
'13 unlimited stripped sport (red one)
'13 JKU sport (blue one)
'10 Unlimited sport (other red one)
'08 Unlimited X (green one)
3JKs1H1 is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 11-12-2011, 11:59 PM   #38
Rock-Rubber

WF Supporting Member
 
GoldenSahara00's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: SCPA
Posts: 16,741
Quote:
Originally Posted by 3JKs1H1
KbwWolf apparently hasn't spent much time behind the wheel in both. I have an '08, '10, and '12. The '12 is decent off the line and passes reasonably well at 70 (w/4.10 and stock 32's). The 12's driveline is quite refined compared to it's 3.8/4sp bretheren. You can regear a 3.8 and make it better than a stock config off the line, but the higher horsepower of the 3.6 is very noticeable at highway speeds. I've logged almost 15K miles on JK'st in the last 6 months, that doesn't count the 2500 miles wheeling an '06 Rubicon in September.
You drive a lot.
__________________
Ryan - A good eye, a light foot, and a smart rig.
Bolt-ons are boring
AMERICAN JEEPER
My Build - http://www.wranglerforum.com/f118/pr...a00-74622.html
Rausch Creek Trip: 2014 Trip Coming Soon
GoldenSahara00 is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 11-13-2011, 12:00 AM   #39
MallCrawler

WF Supporting Member
::WF Moderator::
 
kjeeper10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 37,198
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoldenSahara00

You drive a lot.
Highway miles?
kjeeper10 is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 11-13-2011, 12:10 AM   #40
Jeeper

WF Supporting Member
 
kbwwolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 12,179
Quote:
Originally Posted by 3JKs1H1 View Post
KbwWolf apparently hasn't spent much time behind the wheel in both. I have an '08, '10, and '12. The '12 is decent off the line and passes reasonably well at 70 (w/4.10 and stock 32's). The 12's driveline is quite refined compared to it's 3.8/4sp bretheren. You can regear a 3.8 and make it better than a stock config off the line, but the higher horsepower of the 3.6 is very noticeable at highway speeds. I've logged almost 15K miles on JK'st in the last 6 months, that doesn't count the 2500 miles wheeling an '06 Rubicon in September.
Re-read my post. Then re-read yours. Some discrepancies:

1. I drive a manual.

You said: The 12's driveline is quite refined compared to it's 3.8/4sp bretheren.

I don't argue with that at all. By all accounts, the new 5sp is far superior. I deliberately didn't comment on that because, as noted above, I drive a manual.

2. Neither of em is "decent off the line", but that's entirely subjective. Put two kids on skateboards, tell em to start kickin, and somebody's gonna lose.

3. You'll notice that I did give the 3.6 its props at highway speeds. "The only difference I saw in my test drives was on the freeway. The '12 has more oomph on the top end."

You said: "...the higher horsepower of the 3.6 is very noticeable at highway speeds."

Sounds to me like we're saying the same thing. Of course, I defer to your vastly superior knowledge. After all, you've "logged almost 15K miles on JK'st in the last 6 months, that doesn't count the 2500 miles wheeling an '06 Rubicon in September."

Just curious if that's the '08, the '10, or the '12.

Anyway, I just took a test drive, and am willing to concede the fact that I might very well be the idiot here.

Wouldn't be the first time.
__________________


"What we see depends mainly on what we look for."
—John Lubbock
kbwwolf is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 11-13-2011, 12:14 AM   #41
Jeeper
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Ohio
Posts: 1,251
Lotta highway for me. About 30k+/year. 2 trips to SW Colorado wheeling since July, toss in Yellowstone, NC, it adds up. Waiting for snow in the passes to melt, probably June.
__________________
'14 Anvil JKUR (sold the '12 at 52K miles)
'13 unlimited stripped sport (red one)
'13 JKU sport (blue one)
'10 Unlimited sport (other red one)
'08 Unlimited X (green one)
3JKs1H1 is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 11-13-2011, 12:19 AM   #42
Rock-Rubber

WF Supporting Member
 
GoldenSahara00's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: SCPA
Posts: 16,741
How the heck do you wheel 2500 miles in a month if I may ask. Sounds like some cray stuff.
__________________
Ryan - A good eye, a light foot, and a smart rig.
Bolt-ons are boring
AMERICAN JEEPER
My Build - http://www.wranglerforum.com/f118/pr...a00-74622.html
Rausch Creek Trip: 2014 Trip Coming Soon
GoldenSahara00 is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 11-13-2011, 12:19 AM   #43
Rock-Rubber

WF Supporting Member
 
GoldenSahara00's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: SCPA
Posts: 16,741
Quote:
Originally Posted by kjeeper10

Highway miles?
The 2500 offroad...
__________________
Ryan - A good eye, a light foot, and a smart rig.
Bolt-ons are boring
AMERICAN JEEPER
My Build - http://www.wranglerforum.com/f118/pr...a00-74622.html
Rausch Creek Trip: 2014 Trip Coming Soon
GoldenSahara00 is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 11-13-2011, 12:30 AM   #44
Jeeper
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Ohio
Posts: 1,251
4700 miles in 11 days in late July- whiny passengers. Ohio > Colorado > Yellowstone > back. It was a new '10, not good loaded down at elevation on freeway. Did 3 long days of trails. Other than speeding ticket, zero issues. It could have used lockers though on some sections near Ouray/Silverton/Lake City/Telluride. Then 5900 miles on my '12 already. Flew to Dallas a 6 weeks ago, took buddies '06 TJ Rubi to Ouray trails. It had lockers, it needed chains due to early snow on passes. Going back to outer banks next month.
Put 148k on a '06 Ram in less than 5 years, traded it for '12 Rubi. Do miss the CTD in the Ram.
__________________
'14 Anvil JKUR (sold the '12 at 52K miles)
'13 unlimited stripped sport (red one)
'13 JKU sport (blue one)
'10 Unlimited sport (other red one)
'08 Unlimited X (green one)
3JKs1H1 is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 11-13-2011, 12:36 AM   #45
Rock-Rubber

WF Supporting Member
 
GoldenSahara00's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: SCPA
Posts: 16,741
Your like a vehicle murderer/slave driver...
__________________
Ryan - A good eye, a light foot, and a smart rig.
Bolt-ons are boring
AMERICAN JEEPER
My Build - http://www.wranglerforum.com/f118/pr...a00-74622.html
Rausch Creek Trip: 2014 Trip Coming Soon
GoldenSahara00 is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 11-13-2011, 01:33 AM   #46
Jeeper
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Ohio
Posts: 1,251
I wheel alot, yo
U should see my maintencvehicles,
__________________
'14 Anvil JKUR (sold the '12 at 52K miles)
'13 unlimited stripped sport (red one)
'13 JKU sport (blue one)
'10 Unlimited sport (other red one)
'08 Unlimited X (green one)
3JKs1H1 is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 11-13-2011, 08:05 AM   #47
Jeeper
 
wigman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: in the sticks...thank god
Posts: 98
Denial. It so funny to read. My father wouldn't notice the difference but he never shifted a manual tranny above 2K rpm. I have functioning testicles and I like this faster jeep.

We all need the road to get to the trail. A trans am in the 80s was not as fast as the jeep is now. Just sayin.
wigman is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 11-13-2011, 08:48 AM   #48
MTH
Jeeper
 
MTH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 8,553
Quote:
Originally Posted by wigman
My father wouldn't notice the difference but he never shifted a manual tranny above 2K rpm.
That'd be miserable whether you were being pulled by the either the 3.8 or the 3.6.

This thread has been interesting. In the months before the 2012's release and in the weeks after they became available, threads like this dominated the forum. The question was asked in some form or another nearly every day, and almost every one of those threads turned into a shouting match.

Some folks argued that the 3.8 held up reasonably well and was in truth a victim of poor gearing by Jeep. They said that the 3.6's improvements couldn't be known until they were tested or that in any event they would likely be modest. The guess was that modding (gearing, headers, etc) a 3.8 might be able to come close to the 3.6's stock performance. Others argued that the 3.8 was an utter disaster that was incapable of getting out of its own way, all who owned a jeep with a 3.8 had made a mistake, that the 3.6 would be better than even a supercharged 3.8, would bury the 3.8 in all ways, and would be so perfectly suited to the wrangler that it would be preferable even to a Hemi. They found the suggestion that anything could be done to jeeps with the "slug" engine to even approach the dominance that would come from the 3.6 was laughable. Mods had to lock a number of these threads because they got so heated.

Well, here we are, months later. I think the thread mostly speaks for itself. The 3.6 improves on the 3.8 in all ways. If buying new today, you should probably go for a 2012 (especially if you want an auto trans) unless you can factor the cost of a regear into a 2011 and still come out ahead.

But it turns out the 3.6 isn't the "Jesus engine" and the 3.8 in fact wasn't that bad to begin with. In truth, my view is they're both underpowered for the image JKs and JKUs want to present. We need the kind of low end torque that comes from hemis and diesels, and both the 3.8 and 3.6 are high revving car engines. So it's an imperfect match. That said, I'm satisfied with either until I get 100k+ miles on my stocker and have the money saved up for a swap to something really aggressive. I've got no complaints.
__________________
Mike
2010 JKU "Mountain" Edition
TeraFlex 2.5" Coil Lift : Old Man Emu Nitrocharger Shocks : 33x12.5R15 Goodyear DuraTracs : 15x8 Black Rock 909s : Other Stuff . . .
MTH is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 11-13-2011, 09:10 AM   #49
Rock-Rubber

WF Supporting Member
 
GoldenSahara00's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: SCPA
Posts: 16,741
Quote:
Originally Posted by MTH

That'd be miserable whether you were being pulled by the either the 3.8 or the 3.6.

This thread has been interesting. In the months before the 2012's release and in the weeks after they became available, threads like this dominated the forum. The question was asked in some form or another nearly every day, and almost every one of those threads turned into a shouting match.

Some folks argued that the 3.8 held up reasonably well and was in truth a victim of poor gearing by Jeep. They said that the 3.6's improvements couldn't be known until they were tested or that in any event they would likely be modest. The guess was that modding (gearing, headers, etc) a 3.8 might be able to come close to the 3.6's stock performance. Others argued that the 3.8 was an utter disaster that was incapable of getting out of its own way, all who owned a jeep with a 3.8 had made a mistake, that the 3.6 would be better than even a supercharged 3.8, would bury the 3.8 in all ways, and would be so perfectly suited to the wrangler that it would be preferable even to a Hemi. They found the suggestion that anything could be done to jeeps with the "slug" engine to even approach the dominance that would come from the 3.6 was laughable. Mods had to lock a number of these threads because they got so heated.

Well, here we are, months later. I think the thread mostly speaks for itself. The 3.6 improves on the 3.8 in all ways. If buying new today, you should probably go for a 2012 (especially if you want an auto trans) unless you can factor the cost of a regear into a 2011 and still come out ahead.

But it turns out the 3.6 isn't the "Jesus engine" and the 3.8 in fact wasn't that bad to begin with. In truth, my view is they're both underpowered for the image JKs and JKUs want to present. We need the kind of low end torque that comes from hemis and diesels, and both the 3.8 and 3.6 are high revving car engines. So it's an imperfect match. That said, I'm satisfied with either until I get 100k+ miles on my stocker and have the money saved up for a swap to something really aggressive. I've got no complaints.
And then there was the I6
__________________
Ryan - A good eye, a light foot, and a smart rig.
Bolt-ons are boring
AMERICAN JEEPER
My Build - http://www.wranglerforum.com/f118/pr...a00-74622.html
Rausch Creek Trip: 2014 Trip Coming Soon
GoldenSahara00 is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 11-13-2011, 09:55 AM   #50
Jeeper
 
JIMBOX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 9,914
Morning MTH-man I wish you'd run for president !--my vote for you would be BROADCAST-


Quote:
Originally Posted by MTH View Post
That'd be miserable whether you were being pulled by the either the 3.8 or the 3.6.

This thread has been interesting. In the months before the 2012's release and in the weeks after they became available, threads like this dominated the forum. The question was asked in some form or another nearly every day, and almost every one of those threads turned into a shouting match.

Some folks argued that the 3.8 held up reasonably well and was in truth a victim of poor gearing by Jeep. They said that the 3.6's improvements couldn't be known until they were tested or that in any event they would likely be modest. The guess was that modding (gearing, headers, etc) a 3.8 might be able to come close to the 3.6's stock performance. Others argued that the 3.8 was an utter disaster that was incapable of getting out of its own way, all who owned a jeep with a 3.8 had made a mistake, that the 3.6 would be better than even a supercharged 3.8, would bury the 3.8 in all ways, and would be so perfectly suited to the wrangler that it would be preferable even to a Hemi. They found the suggestion that anything could be done to jeeps with the "slug" engine to even approach the dominance that would come from the 3.6 was laughable. Mods had to lock a number of these threads because they got so heated.

Well, here we are, months later. I think the thread mostly speaks for itself. The 3.6 improves on the 3.8 in all ways. If buying new today, you should probably go for a 2012 (especially if you want an auto trans) unless you can factor the cost of a regear into a 2011 and still come out ahead.

But it turns out the 3.6 isn't the "Jesus engine" and the 3.8 in fact wasn't that bad to begin with. In truth, my view is they're both underpowered for the image JKs and JKUs want to present. We need the kind of low end torque that comes from hemis and diesels, and both the 3.8 and 3.6 are high revving car engines. So it's an imperfect match. That said, I'm satisfied with either until I get 100k+ miles on my stocker and have the money saved up for a swap to something really aggressive. I've got no complaints.
This engine modification and always (50%) better, has been going on for over 80 years in the auto industry-

Man I've gone thru the Corvette engine updates thru the 60'S/80's/90's and they were SIGNIFICANT, not to mention the Chrusler muscle cars of the 60's-

I've had "CUDAS", "CHALLENGERS" from 360cuin to 426cuin, now you talk about horsepower/performance increases--SHAZAM !

Now I agree, the 2012 is a better technology improved ENGINE/AUTO combo AND IT'S new, EVERYBODY WANTS A NEW CAR, SO JEEPS AREN'T ANY DIFFERENT-

I'm afraid the because of ALL the HYPE surrounding the "Jesus engine", that Noobies feel that jeeps weren't even invented till 2012--

I totally agree with MTH/rics realistic comments, all I'll say is, if you haven't driven a 3.8L JKU/w 5.38 diff. gears, then you just don't know what the "little" 3.8L is capable of and it is really phenominal !

Smokemjfyougotem

JIMBO
__________________
"ya gotta have class"
JIMBOX is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 11-13-2011, 10:10 AM   #51
MallCrawler

WF Supporting Member
::WF Moderator::
 
kjeeper10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 37,198
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoldenSahara00

And then there was the I6
In a Jk would be just as sad :P
kjeeper10 is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 11-13-2011, 02:05 PM   #52
The Bad Guy

WF Supporting Member
 
daggo66's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: NJ exile living in Baltimore
Posts: 22,290
Quote:
Originally Posted by 3JKs1H1 View Post
It was a new '10, not good loaded down at elevation on freeway. Did 3 long days of trails. Other than speeding ticket, zero issues.

Ah HA!
__________________
Tom

"I've got two things in this world, my balls and my word and I don't break them for no one."
daggo66 is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 11-13-2011, 02:30 PM   #53
Jeeper
 
theotis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Central Ohio
Posts: 195
Some important numbers if you want to talk engine performance comparisons between 3.6, 3.8, 4.0.

Curb Wt
YJ 3083lbs
TJ 3539lbs
JK 3785lbs
JKU 4100lbs
theotis is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 11-13-2011, 02:59 PM   #54
MallCrawler

WF Supporting Member
::WF Moderator::
 
kjeeper10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 37,198
Quote:
Originally Posted by theotis
Some important numbers if you want to talk engine performance comparisons between 3.6, 3.8, 4.0.

Curb Wt
YJ 3083lbs
TJ 3539lbs
JK 3785lbs
JKU 4100lbs
Imagine the Jesus engine in a Yj
kjeeper10 is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 11-13-2011, 06:08 PM   #55
Rock-Rubber

WF Supporting Member
 
GoldenSahara00's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: SCPA
Posts: 16,741
Quote:
Originally Posted by kjeeper10 View Post
In a Jk would be just as sad :P

possibly. actuallly the 4.0 runs a 9.2 0-60 times... faster than the jks. until 2012 that is. they do have emphasis on low range torque though which is exactly what you all agree the jk lacks. If I were jeep I would have put a stroked 4.6 I6 in the JK and then with the improved gearing.. oh yea.
__________________
Ryan - A good eye, a light foot, and a smart rig.
Bolt-ons are boring
AMERICAN JEEPER
My Build - http://www.wranglerforum.com/f118/pr...a00-74622.html
Rausch Creek Trip: 2014 Trip Coming Soon
GoldenSahara00 is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 09-02-2012, 08:35 PM   #56
Jeeper
 
MichiganJeepster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Michigan
Posts: 286
I picked up my 2012 with the 3.6L and 5 speed auto with 3.73 gears and I have to say that the transmission with its 3.59 to 1 ratio first gear makes it feel pretty torquey when getting this JKU rolling. I added the Banks Ram Air and Flowmaster 80 series crossflow muffler with resonator left in place and this Jeep flat out hauls ass and im getting 18mpg with 35" BFG All Terrains and AEV 2.5" lift. Love the mileage with this new powertrain and its smooth. Getting on the freeway is a breeze and passing on two lane roads is fun now instead of the death grip hoping you were going to make it experience of the 3.8L. No drone with the exhaust but it is a little loud when you get on it.2012 Jeep Wrangler 80 Series Flowmaster - YouTube
MichiganJeepster is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 09-02-2012, 08:48 PM   #57
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Someplace in Africa
Posts: 3,287
We own both and there isn't a real noticeable difference until your on the freeway. But our 2010 2 door with 513 gears will smoke our 2012 four door rubicon with 4.10s 0-60
pluke the 2 is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 09-02-2012, 08:50 PM   #58
MallCrawler

WF Supporting Member
::WF Moderator::
 
kjeeper10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 37,198
Quote:
Originally Posted by pluke the 2
We own both and there isn't a real noticeable difference until your on the freeway. But our 2010 2 door with 513 gears will smoke our 2012 four door rubicon with 4.10s 0-60
Mmmmmm gears
kjeeper10 is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 09-02-2012, 09:04 PM   #59
Jeeper
 
WXman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Central Kentucky, USA
Posts: 1,746
I can't believe there are still some who regard the ancient 4.0L I-6 as the standard. Have you seen dyno sheets on them? The 3.8L actually made the same torque, and more horsepower. The 3.8L didn't give up ANYTHING to the 4.0L.

The 4.slow was heavy as a boat anchor, leaked oil like a sieve, got miserable fuel economy, and made no horsepower at all. The only reason it was remotely acceptable was becuase it was in 4x4s that weighed less than many family cars. Also, they either would go 500,000 miles or they would blow up at 50,000. It was a crap shoot...never knew what you were going to get. I for one don't miss the 4.0 at all.
__________________
~Lots of modded Jeeps and a Toyota 4Runner~
WXman is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 09-02-2012, 09:14 PM   #60
Jeeper
 
Ballandchain's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Richmond, Va
Posts: 1,047
Images: 2
Quote:
Originally Posted by WXman
I can't believe there are still some who regard the ancient 4.0L I-6 as the standard. Have you seen dyno sheets on them? The 3.8L actually made the same torque, and more horsepower. The 3.8L didn't give up ANYTHING to the 4.0L.

The 4.slow was heavy as a boat anchor, leaked oil like a sieve, got miserable fuel economy, and made no horsepower at all. The only reason it was remotely acceptable was becuase it was in 4x4s that weighed less than many family cars. Also, they either would go 500,000 miles or they would blow up at 50,000. It was a crap shoot...never knew what you were going to get. I for one don't miss the 4.0 at all.
At one time I thought the Sony Walkman was the best thing since sliced bread. My how things change....

__________________
Current:2012 Dozer Sahara Past: 97 4banger x2, 2001 Sport heavily modified, 08 Rubicon. "I'm glad that I'm not like most people. That's because I think most people are stupid." -Me
Ballandchain is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Jeep Wrangler Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off




Download our Mobile App

» Network Links
»Jeep Parts
» Featured Product

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:56 AM.



Jeep®, Wrangler, Liberty, Wagoneer, Cherokee, and Grand Cherokee are copyrighted and trademarked to Chrysler Motors LLC.
Wranglerforum.com is not in any way associated with the Chrysler Motors LLC