|11-24-2013 10:34 PM|
slight problems, i have a 3.8 that uses not a little oil, its to the tune of more than a qt a thousand, and chrysler says that is witnin specs, after 65ooo miles a qt every 750 is within specs, i say bullsh.. am getting ready to go to the massachusetts envoirmental board and see what they say about all this extra oil polluting both the air and wherever else it goes
|07-10-2013 01:37 PM|
|07-10-2013 01:22 PM|
3.6 / 3.8
hi, i have had both 3.8 auto 2007 2 door. and 2012 3.6 2 door both very good, however the 3.8 got about 13 mpg's the 3.6 gets 23mpg's
i think u can figure it out.. LIFE IS GOOD! THE DIESEL SHOULD BE NEXT
YEAR, 33 MPG'S.......
|07-10-2013 11:54 AM|
|Barnburner||I haven't read all replies. I will say when I was deciding between the two, I test drove jeeps with the different motors and same gearing and made my decision that way. It might depend on what you want it for...If it was gonna be a weekend driver or beach jeep maybe it wouldn't have mattered to me. Mine however is a daily driver that I'm gonna pull a boat with quite a bit and for me the 3.6 was head and shoulders above the 3.8 for what I wanted.|
|07-10-2013 10:56 AM|
But that's not the point. You're not really asking whether ANYBODY has had problems. Rather, you're asking about the 3.8 GENERALLY. Whether your specific 3.8 has some hidden defect that's going to cause it to crap out after 10k more miles, I have no idea. But then again, nobody knows that about any engine in their vehicle.
Regarding the 3.8 generally, the people you've heard from are confusing "powerful" with "reliable."
The 3.8s is an old design. It's been around for many years, and is time-tested, easy to repair, and ultimately very reliable. Chrysler put the 3.8 in many vehicles over the years long before it was in the JK, and it's not unusual to see them with 200k or more miles.
So if there's a problem generally with the 3.8, it's not reliability. Your friends are misinformed.
If there's a problem generally with the 3.8, it's power. The 3.8 only puts out about 200 horsepower. And I forget the torque numbers, but they're not spectacular either. Ideally, you'd want both more horsepower and more torque than the 3.8 puts out to move a 4000 lb 4 door Wrangler with aftermarket steel bumpers, upsize mud tires, a lift, etc.
Still, it's enough. Just make sure you regear the differentials to account for upsized tires, especially if you have an auto transmission.
Other than not being a speed demon, there's no reason to fear a well-maintained 3.8 that you personally know has been performing well. If you've had 65k trouble-free miles and have been keeping all of your maintenance current, I'd have no qualms about setting a realistic budget and modding away.
The only caveat on that is that the 3.8 does tend to burn oil. This only seems to affect the longevity of the engine in extreme cases, provided that you are aware of it. Check your oil level every week or so at the gas station, and make sure you add a quart if necessary between oil changes. If you've got to add more than a quart every 3k miles, then I'd say you're an "extreme case." But other than that, you should be good-to-go.
For what it's worth, my 2010 has 50k miles on it. I stick to the maintenance schedule, have had no problems, and don't expect any.
|07-10-2013 10:15 AM|
Hi guys I have a 2009 jeep wrangler 4 door with a 3.8 motor in it I have been looking to start to build it up but before I do I need to know if the motor in my jeep is any good I have hear from some people that the motor starts to fall apart after about 90k I have about 65k on it now and I do get all the schedule maintainence and love my jeep please let me know if any one out there have had any problems with there's or hear facts thanks again
|09-03-2012 02:58 AM|
Are they reliable? probably yes, very proven technology and get the work done.
Are they better than LCD? no, in almost every aspect the new HD LCD is better, but they're not proven to be reliable yet.
As a geek, have seen many times that there are some people who just don't want to accept the new things.
|09-02-2012 11:48 PM|
|09-02-2012 11:19 PM|
Thanks for the laugh, Barrie, I needed that!
|09-02-2012 11:18 PM|
|Deepjeep1371||Just took my 2012 Altitude to the salt flats and broke the sound barrier! You should have heard those seat belts flapping. Thank god for the included Mopar "oh shit" handles. Lmmfao|
|09-02-2012 11:11 PM|
|Dogzilla||Does anybody know if the new 3.6 will do a burnout??|
|09-02-2012 10:37 PM|
It's still a better motor than the two followed it.
|09-02-2012 10:30 PM|
I drove a 2012 JKU Sahara 3.6 automatic and 3.21 gearing, and I thought it was a lethargic dog compared to my 3.8L 2007 manual 4:10 geared JKU.
That said, I'm sure a 3.6 with 3.73 or 4:10 would make me eat dust, but I can't complain about my 3.8 not being peppy enough with the right gearing.
|09-02-2012 09:14 PM|
|09-02-2012 09:04 PM|
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.
|09-02-2012 08:50 PM|
|09-02-2012 08:48 PM|
|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|
|09-02-2012 08:35 PM|
|MichiganJeepster||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|
|11-13-2011 06:08 PM|
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.
|11-13-2011 02:59 PM|
|11-13-2011 02:30 PM|
Some important numbers if you want to talk engine performance comparisons between 3.6, 3.8, 4.0.
|11-13-2011 02:05 PM|
|11-13-2011 10:10 AM|
|11-13-2011 09:55 AM|
Morning MTH-man I wish you'd run for president !--my vote for you would be BROADCAST-
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 !
|11-13-2011 09:10 AM|
|11-13-2011 08:48 AM|
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.
|11-13-2011 08:05 AM|
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.
|11-13-2011 01:33 AM|
I wheel alot, yo
U should see my maintencvehicles,
|11-13-2011 12:36 AM|
|GoldenSahara00||Your like a vehicle murderer/slave driver...|
|11-13-2011 12:30 AM|
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.
|This thread has more than 30 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.|