Everyone who complains about the 3.8 not having enough power... - 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 04-27-2011, 11:07 AM   #31
Official WF thread de-railer
 
Mr. Sinister's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Fair Hill, Maryland
Posts: 3,702
Quote:
Originally Posted by daggo66 View Post
Exactly. The 3.6 is going to be great for the Wrangler. That doesn't mean the 3.8 is suddenly worthless.
Well of course it does, it's not like the JK is the BEST SELLING WRANGLER OF ALL TIME per year or anything, underpowered or not.

__________________
My battle with Chrysler over getting my Jeep repaired under warranty: http://www.wranglerforum.com/f33/ins...ml#post3467156
Mr. Sinister is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 04-27-2011, 11:30 AM   #32
Jeeper
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Arvada, CO
Posts: 35
I have a 6 speed. I just put 35's on it using the stock wheels. It's certainly NOT a hotrod but I didn't buy it for that. I have a V10 Dodge Ram 4x4 and a 67 GTO if I feel the need for speed.

Mountain_Goat is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 04-27-2011, 12:05 PM   #33
Jeeper

WF Supporting Member
 
RaiderRUBICON's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: oak brook IL
Posts: 698
Quote:
Originally Posted by daggo66 View Post
Actually they don't. If they did, they wouldn't have changed from standard 4.10 gearing on '07 automatics to 3.21. They were much more concerned with MPG.

They are not switching to the 3.6 to add more "power" to the Wrangler. They are switching so that they can build 1 6 cylinder engine instead of 5 (3.8, 3.7, 3.5, I6 4.0, and V6 4.0)
OK Tom, so you believe that the change to a higher output engine for the Wrangler was coincidental??So you think the actions of 07 have a bearing on what they are doing for 2012?

The reality is this ,Chrysler is going to put a stronger engine in the Wrangler.If you want to believe it is because they are simplifying production ,go ahead. I don't believe that.The Wrangler was due for an engine enhancement.

AJ
RaiderRUBICON is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 04-27-2011, 12:11 PM   #34
Jeeper

WF Supporting Member
 
RaiderRUBICON's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: oak brook IL
Posts: 698
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Sinister View Post
I'll quote myself:
"Would more power benefit the Wrangler? Definitely. Nobody is debating that."
And yes, people do buy a Wrangler for the look. Just like Hummers, Corvettes, Mustangs, etc etc, and never use them for their intended purpose. More power to those folks, but it's tough to take the complaints of those people seriously. I have yet to run into a scenario where I NEED more power. If you do, you're not living within the capabilities of your vehicle. If you do need more power, you should spend the money on your vehicle where it needs it in your particular case. Ripp, AEV and others have just the ticket. Jeep is going to sell the hell out of Wranglers either way.
Progress can be just as detrimental to the enthusiast as stagnation. Look at how complicated vehicles are now. Look how expensive they are because of it. And highway deaths continue to happen. Look at the horsepower wars from the 60's and what happened when the insurance companies and the federal government stepped in. It took damn near 30 years to fully recover. Horsepower has always cost money. But "progress" is making horsepower unaffordable for the masses, and you can bank on that.
God , Bill ,why so cynical????

"progress" is making HP unaffordable? Your oversimplifying here.The world pays for safety ,bigtime!! its not just HP that makes a car too expensive,among many other variables.


AJ
RaiderRUBICON is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 04-27-2011, 12:15 PM   #35
Jeeper

WF Supporting Member
 
RaiderRUBICON's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: oak brook IL
Posts: 698
Quote:
Originally Posted by daggo66 View Post
Exactly. The 3.6 is going to be great for the Wrangler. That doesn't mean the 3.8 is suddenly worthless.
Tom, I don't think anybody dare say the 3.8 is worthless,I love my 08 Rub, it has been awesome.But I am also a big fan of change,especially in the car world.The Wrangler is going to get better, like that other post , How "exciting", thats good for all of us.

AJ
RaiderRUBICON is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 04-27-2011, 12:18 PM   #36
Jeeper
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 2,362
This whole debate is overdone. Bottom line is:

(1) You're not going anywhere with a Pentastar you couldn't have gone with a 3.8.

(2) The Pentastar is a substantial improvement in power over the 3.8 that will make for a better on-the-road experience for many drivers.

So basically decide how important (2) is to you and base your decision off of that, because (1) isn't going to be any different even if they put the Hemi in the freakin' wrangler.
i82much is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 04-27-2011, 12:21 PM   #37
Jeeper
 
vze2372e's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 375
I have no issue with my 3.8 other than mileage - but then on 5.13's with 35's what did I expect? the Jeep looks small compared to other vehicles, until you throw it in nuetral on a dirt floor and try to roll it forward yourself 5 inches - holy crap! (I was aligning my zerk fittings on the drive shafts with my creeper to toss them some grease)

The 3.8 works fine in the Wrangler, and I don't want extra unsprung weight over my nose anyway from a larger engine. How fast do you want to go anyway in a vehicle with a 6' wheelbase anyway?

It starts, it runs, it stops, it accelerates acceptable, it has a warranty - sold
__________________
2010 Rubicon 6spd - 35" Mud Countrys, 4" RC X Series Lift, Tom Woods Driveshafts, 5.13 gears, ARB Diff Covers, River Raider Breathers, AEV Snorkle, AEV ProCal Module, 12.5k Winch - Drive it like you stole it
vze2372e is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 04-27-2011, 12:30 PM   #38
Jeeper

WF Supporting Member
 
RaiderRUBICON's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: oak brook IL
Posts: 698
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Sinister View Post
Well of course it does, it's not like the JK is the BEST SELLING WRANGLER OF ALL TIME per year or anything, underpowered or not.
BILL, the JK wrangler is the best Wrangler ever made.The term underpowered comes from the magazines whom evaluate these vehicles based on a "power/weight ratio".

Relative to its competition,the Wrangler is underpowered.We all love our wranglers,and we all concede that our Jks do everything we ask.The 3.6 with 290hp should make our Wranglers better.

Everything has changed since 2009,as far as the Wrangler is concerned, we should see more changes to our Jeeps over the next 3 years,than we have over the last 25.

Chrysler said,the Wrangler is one of the vehicles that is going to save Chrysler. That was awesome news!! that means, "we are going to put more money into this vehicle" Prepare for many changes,I like to refer to as UPGRADES. yahoo!!! You are right in one aspect,they better not let the Wrangler get too expensive,that could be seriously counterproductive.

AJ
RaiderRUBICON is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 04-27-2011, 12:36 PM   #39
Jeeper
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Hancock, ME
Posts: 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by SylvanSahara View Post
my truck i replaced w/ the Wrangler was an '08 Trailblazer SS AWD that had 390Hp and not only hauled stuff but hauled A$$, it also only got 14mpg in the city driving very light footed(most of my friends that had'em got 9-10mpg inthe city).
I just replaced an '07 Trailblazer SS AWD with a Wrangler too.

Regrets so far - none!
ed_s is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 04-27-2011, 12:42 PM   #40
Official WF thread de-railer
 
Mr. Sinister's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Fair Hill, Maryland
Posts: 3,702
Quote:
Originally Posted by RaiderRUBICON View Post
God , Bill ,why so cynical????

"progress" is making HP unaffordable? Your oversimplifying here.The world pays for safety ,bigtime!! its not just HP that makes a car too expensive,among many other variables.


AJ
Because I've been around the hobby long enough to know that "good" things aren't always good. I've seen the same smoke being blown up our posteriors before.

Cars are safer. They're also faster, heavier, more complex and much more expensive, and none of it has decreased fatalities. What good is paying more for "safety" when it doesn't save more lives? The increased costs are not in tune with increased safety in the real world. WE are still the same fragile beings driving these machines that we have always been. FARS Encyclopedia
Everything else is subjective. We paid to make cars bigger, faster, heavier, all to the delight of the insurance companies, oil companies and so on. A fender bender might have cost you a few bucks to fix 25 years ago. Now it's an arm and a leg. 40mpg is a big deal all of the sudden, but a mid 80's Civic did it with no fanfare back then. We spent a ton of extra money on emissions controls for our cars, but a properly tuned carbureted car can run just as clean. You used to be able to work on your own car, but now with computer controlled, electronic everything, even the mechanics have a tough time tracking down a problem. I mean, how many times have you seen a frustrated owner told "We couldn't reproduce the problem"?
Progress? Yeah, progressively more expensive, restrictive and complicated.
__________________
My battle with Chrysler over getting my Jeep repaired under warranty: http://www.wranglerforum.com/f33/ins...ml#post3467156
Mr. Sinister is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 04-27-2011, 12:46 PM   #41
Jeeper

WF Supporting Member
 
RaiderRUBICON's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: oak brook IL
Posts: 698
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Sinister View Post
Because I've been around the hobby long enough to know that "good" things aren't always good. I've seen the same smoke being blown up our posteriors before.

Cars are safer. They're also faster, heavier, more complex and much more expensive, and none of it has decreased fatalities. What good is paying more for "safety" when it doesn't save more lives? The increased costs are not in tune with increased safety in the real world. WE are still the same fragile beings driving these machines that we have always been. FARS Encyclopedia
Everything else is subjective. We paid to make cars bigger, faster, heavier, all to the delight of the insurance companies, oil companies and so on. A fender bender might have cost you a few bucks to fix 25 years ago. Now it's an arm and a leg. 40mpg is a big deal all of the sudden, but a mid 80's Civic did it with no fanfare back then. We spent a ton of extra money on emissions controls for our cars, but a properly tuned carbureted car can run just as clean. You used to be able to work on your own car, but now with computer controlled, electronic everything, even the mechanics have a tough time tracking down a problem. I mean, how many times have you seen a frustrated owner told "We couldn't reproduce the problem"?
Progress? Yeah, progressively more expensive, restrictive and complicated.

Well you are right in many ways there.Someday I'm going to have a nice cold beer with you Billy boy.

AJ
RaiderRUBICON is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 04-27-2011, 12:54 PM   #42
Official WF thread de-railer
 
Mr. Sinister's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Fair Hill, Maryland
Posts: 3,702
Quote:
Originally Posted by RaiderRUBICON View Post
BILL, the JK wrangler is the best Wrangler ever made.The term underpowered comes from the magazines whom evaluate these vehicles based on a "power/weight ratio".

Relative to its competition,the Wrangler is underpowered.We all love our wranglers,and we all concede that our Jks do everything we ask.The 3.6 with 290hp should make our Wranglers better.

Everything has changed since 2009,as far as the Wrangler is concerned, we should see more changes to our Jeeps over the next 3 years,than we have over the last 25.

Chrysler said,the Wrangler is one of the vehicles that is going to save Chrysler. That was awesome news!! that means, "we are going to put more money into this vehicle" Prepare for many changes,I like to refer to as UPGRADES. yahoo!!! You are right in one aspect,they better not let the Wrangler get too expensive,that could be seriously counterproductive.

AJ
Nobody is arguing any of that (though I seriously doubt the 290hp figure, I'd bet more like 260 and a similar torque output to the 3.8). If anything, the new engine should cost LESS to produce, since it's used in everything now. We'll see how that translates to the customer.

The problem with magazine comparisons is the Wrangler has no direct competition. What's the closest thing? The Toyota FJ? It's no hotrod either. A CRV? Rav4? Please. Try to take either vehicle down the same trails a Jeep can go. The "competitors" are on-road vehicles first, with limited off-road capability. Their added on-road performance means NOTHING on the trail. The Wrangler is and has always been off-road first, on-road second. Peak hp, power/weight, that stuff doesn't matter as much in the dirt or on the trail. Usable power does. And in my particular opinion, this new 3.6 better damn well not be jumpy off idle or have a peaky power curve, because that will lead to a WORSE performing vehicle off-road. More power doesn't necessarily make the Wrangler better for it's intended purpose, off-road.
There's 2 types of off-roader in my eyes: Guys who just mash the loud pedal and try to power through everything, and guys who know how to more effectively use what they have to their advantage. I'm of the latter group. So while the gun it and pray guys will no doubt benefit from more power off-road, guys like me won't necessarily. Progress is good, but only when it improves the breed.
__________________
My battle with Chrysler over getting my Jeep repaired under warranty: http://www.wranglerforum.com/f33/ins...ml#post3467156
Mr. Sinister is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 04-27-2011, 12:55 PM   #43
Jeeper
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 2,362
Quote:
Originally Posted by RaiderRUBICON View Post

Relative to its competition,the Wrangler is underpowered.

AJ
Hmm. I tend to look at it a different way. The Wrangler has no competition. Which is why it can get away with being underpowered.
i82much is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 04-27-2011, 12:55 PM   #44
Official WF thread de-railer
 
Mr. Sinister's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Fair Hill, Maryland
Posts: 3,702
Quote:
Originally Posted by RaiderRUBICON View Post
Well you are right in many ways there.Someday I'm going to have a nice cold beer with you Billy boy.

AJ
It would be my pleasure.
This stuff is never personal, thanks for not taking it that way.
__________________
My battle with Chrysler over getting my Jeep repaired under warranty: http://www.wranglerforum.com/f33/ins...ml#post3467156
Mr. Sinister is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 04-27-2011, 01:12 PM   #45
Official WF thread de-railer
 
Mr. Sinister's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Fair Hill, Maryland
Posts: 3,702
Let me say I have always felt, and still do feel, that the Wrangler deserves a dedicated powertrain. A unique engine and transmission, suited for the Wranglers' capabilities. It's in a class by itself, and Chrysler would do well to realize that, and not by re-purposing engines and transmissions from commuter cars. The Wrangler could exist as a brand by itself. Even Chrysler said the Wrangler is instrumental in their recovery and future success. Pay it the respect it deserves.
I don't hate the Pentastar, it just seems like Chrysler could do better in the Wrangler.
__________________
My battle with Chrysler over getting my Jeep repaired under warranty: http://www.wranglerforum.com/f33/ins...ml#post3467156
Mr. Sinister is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 04-27-2011, 01:47 PM   #46
Jeeper
 
danieldlg_13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Houston
Posts: 1,012
Send a message via MSN to danieldlg_13 Send a message via Yahoo to danieldlg_13
Looks like the OP got an answer he wasn't looing for.
danieldlg_13 is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 04-27-2011, 01:51 PM   #47
Jeeper

WF Supporting Member
 
RaiderRUBICON's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: oak brook IL
Posts: 698
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Sinister View Post
Let me say I have always felt, and still do feel, that the Wrangler deserves a dedicated powertrain. A unique engine and transmission, suited for the Wranglers' capabilities. It's in a class by itself, and Chrysler would do well to realize that, and not by re-purposing engines and transmissions from commuter cars. The Wrangler could exist as a brand by itself. Even Chrysler said the Wrangler is instrumental in their recovery and future success. Pay it the respect it deserves.
I don't hate the Pentastar, it just seems like Chrysler could do better in the Wrangler.
I'll drink to that!!!!!!!!!!!!!


AJ
RaiderRUBICON is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 04-27-2011, 02:01 PM   #48
Official WF thread de-railer
 
Mr. Sinister's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Fair Hill, Maryland
Posts: 3,702
Quote:
Originally Posted by danieldlg_13 View Post
Looks like the OP got an answer he wasn't looing for.
welcome to wrangler forum!!
__________________
My battle with Chrysler over getting my Jeep repaired under warranty: http://www.wranglerforum.com/f33/ins...ml#post3467156
Mr. Sinister is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 04-27-2011, 02:05 PM   #49
The Bad Guy

WF Supporting Member
 
daggo66's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: NJ exile living in Baltimore
Posts: 21,476
Quote:
Originally Posted by RaiderRUBICON View Post
OK Tom, so you believe that the change to a higher output engine for the Wrangler was coincidental??So you think the actions of 07 have a bearing on what they are doing for 2012?

The reality is this ,Chrysler is going to put a stronger engine in the Wrangler.If you want to believe it is because they are simplifying production ,go ahead. I don't believe that.The Wrangler was due for an engine enhancement.

AJ
It's actually a fact. Development of the 3.6 began prior to 2006. It's name was Phoenix and was later changed to Pentastar due to trademark issues. I'm sure the JK was designed with that in mind and was another reason they went with the 3.8 over the 4.0 so it could be easily dropped in during production without significant changes.

The 3.6 is in no way a response to claims of poor performance in the JK. If it were, wouldn't the JK have been the first to get it instead of last?
__________________
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 04-27-2011, 02:13 PM   #50
Jeeper
 
LaTuFu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Virginia
Posts: 1,043
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Sinister View Post
Let me say I have always felt, and still do feel, that the Wrangler deserves a dedicated powertrain. A unique engine and transmission, suited for the Wranglers' capabilities. It's in a class by itself, and Chrysler would do well to realize that, and not by re-purposing engines and transmissions from commuter cars. The Wrangler could exist as a brand by itself. Even Chrysler said the Wrangler is instrumental in their recovery and future success. Pay it the respect it deserves.
I don't hate the Pentastar, it just seems like Chrysler could do better in the Wrangler.
While I agree with your argument, it won't happen because its just not economical.

Every auto manufacturer out there cross platforms their production methods as much as possible. GM, VW, Ford, and a host of others are attempting to streamline that even more.

That isn't a problem as long as the engines and transmissions are paired up properly to deliver adequate MPG and performance for each application. Neither of which, it seems, Chrysler cared to do with the 3.8 in the wrangler.

All I can see Chrysler doing is positioning the most marketable brands they have (Jeep and Ram trucks) for possible sale. Has anyone noticed that they are no longer "Dodge Ram Trucks" but simply "Ram Trucks?"
LaTuFu is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 04-27-2011, 02:20 PM   #51
Official WF thread de-railer
 
Mr. Sinister's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Fair Hill, Maryland
Posts: 3,702
Quote:
Originally Posted by LaTuFu View Post
While I agree with your argument, it won't happen because its just not economical.

Every auto manufacturer out there cross platforms their production methods as much as possible. GM, VW, Ford, and a host of others are attempting to streamline that even more.

That isn't a problem as long as the engines and transmissions are paired up properly to deliver adequate MPG and performance for each application. Neither of which, it seems, Chrysler cared to do with the 3.8 in the wrangler.

All I can see Chrysler doing is positioning the most marketable brands they have (Jeep and Ram trucks) for possible sale. Has anyone noticed that they are no longer "Dodge Ram Trucks" but simply "Ram Trucks?"
You're right, it won't. At least not now or in the foreseeable. I know that, but it still stands that this is the IDEAL solution.
Chrysler selling their 2 most profitable products would be suicide, unless they're just looking to line their shareholders' pockets. But that is the corporate culture these days......
__________________
My battle with Chrysler over getting my Jeep repaired under warranty: http://www.wranglerforum.com/f33/ins...ml#post3467156
Mr. Sinister is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 04-27-2011, 02:36 PM   #52
Jeeper

WF Supporting Member
 
ghendrix6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 203
Images: 6
I did not even know that my 2010 JK lacked power, until I read about it on WF.
I have an auto with 373's. Maybe that helps but, honestly, I am confused about all this. I am just not getting the "underpowered" feeling.
ghendrix6 is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 04-27-2011, 02:38 PM   #53
Jeeper
 
danieldlg_13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Houston
Posts: 1,012
Send a message via MSN to danieldlg_13 Send a message via Yahoo to danieldlg_13
Quote:
Originally Posted by ghendrix6 View Post
I did not even know that my 2010 JK lacked power, until I read about it on WF.
I have an auto with 373's. Maybe that helps but, honestly, I am confused about all this. I am just not getting the "underpowered" feeling.
It was just the OP's, and a select few, opinion.
danieldlg_13 is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 04-27-2011, 02:43 PM   #54
The Bad Guy

WF Supporting Member
 
daggo66's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: NJ exile living in Baltimore
Posts: 21,476
Quote:
Originally Posted by ghendrix6 View Post
I did not even know that my 2010 JK lacked power, until I read about it on WF.
I have an auto with 373's. Maybe that helps but, honestly, I am confused about all this. I am just not getting the "underpowered" feeling.
I completely agree. The engine is very smooth and quiet whcih doesn't make it seem "powerful". I have no problem getting up to speed when entering a highway. The day I got it my wife took it for a drive. We went out on the highway and by the time we were fully merged she had hit 80! I had to remind her to slow it down during the break in period.
__________________
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 04-27-2011, 02:43 PM   #55
Jeeper

WF Supporting Member
 
RaiderRUBICON's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: oak brook IL
Posts: 698
Quote:
Originally Posted by danieldlg_13 View Post
It was just the OP's, and a select few, opinion.
RaiderRUBICON is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 04-27-2011, 02:43 PM   #56
Official WF thread de-railer
 
Mr. Sinister's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Fair Hill, Maryland
Posts: 3,702
Quote:
Originally Posted by ghendrix6 View Post
I did not even know that my 2010 JK lacked power, until I read about it on WF.
Post of the Year.
__________________
My battle with Chrysler over getting my Jeep repaired under warranty: http://www.wranglerforum.com/f33/ins...ml#post3467156
Mr. Sinister is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 04-27-2011, 02:46 PM   #57
Jeeper
 
JIMBOX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 9,916
Notta chance,!!


Quote:
Originally Posted by Thracks View Post
...should have got the 6-speed.

Anyone else agree?
JIMBO
__________________
"ya gotta have class"
JIMBOX is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 04-27-2011, 03:30 PM   #58
Jeeper

WF Supporting Member
 
ghendrix6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 203
Images: 6
Also, this motor seems to really like 2600 RPM's and above. It feels a little quicker in acceleration.
ghendrix6 is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 04-27-2011, 03:33 PM   #59
Jeeper
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 139
Everyone who complains about the 3.8 not having enough power...

should wait and buy a 2012 with the Pentastar.
Wrangler2012 is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 04-27-2011, 04:17 PM   #60
Jeeper
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 33
Howdy folks,
I have driven and raced drag cars since 1961 and am no stranger to speed. I am liking my 3.8 engine better every day. It is smooth, quiet, and is easy on gas compared to my last Z-71 truck. This much maligned little engine does exactly what it was designed to do. It was never meant to be a wheel standing, ground shaking thumper. I think that if it is maintained and not over loaded with tall tires(with no gear change), and added weight that it will do what it was meant to do. To each his own, I am happy with my little boat anchor engine!!!!!! Have a goodun!!!

Ol Tex 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:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
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


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Loosing power to radio, cig lighter, and turn ksplayland YJ Tech Forum 4 02-11-2012 05:11 PM
1964 CJ5 Adding Power Breaks & Power maybe power steering mrbigglzworth CJ Tech Forum 0 01-17-2011 10:27 AM
2001 TJ - Auxiliary Power (Switched) - Problem jordan.cook TJ General Discussion Forum 10 12-22-2009 07:16 AM
Linear amp Question silvergoat Communications and Electronics 19 11-07-2008 05:11 PM



» Network Links
»Jeep Parts
» Featured Product

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



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