Any 2.0 liter regrets? - Page 5 - Jeep Wrangler Forum
Jeep Wrangler Forum

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

Join Wrangler Forum Today


Like Tree183Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools

Please support our sponsors and let them know you heard about them on WranglerForum.com
Old 04-14-2019, 09:20 PM   #121
Jeeper
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strommen95 View Post
Nope, not non sense at all. There’s a decent amount of people who agree with me the 2.0 is sluggish. It’s a 4 cylinder and turbo lag is very real. It’s ironic, you call my post non sense, and follow it up by posting absolutely nothing of value at all.

Here’s a video showing 3.6 is faster with a quick YouTube search. It’s not the only one.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=QzXTpul1mSM
I will repeat myself as well.

There are 26 articles written on the JL from major magazines some doing 0-60 and some doing 1/4mile and not one of them has v6 recording a faster time. You find a video already posted multiple times by a major dufus who does a 0-60 run starting off in a turn effectively shutting down e=torque. That V6 JL also has an intake and catback. I'm not sure he may even have a tune b/c in his in his build prior to that test he was discussing testing different tunes. Even with those article I still wouldn't bet my life the 2.0 is faster b/c no magazine tested back to back same models, mainly b/c its a jeep and they feel it is irrelevant. I agree with those magazines. I will soon before the end of May give you a real life video of a JLUR V6 vs 2.0 JLUR because my brother happens to have the V6.

1. The 2.0 is not a new engine, its been in the Alfa Romeo Guilia which started production on 02/16. The bottom end of the engine is designed to handle 420ft/lb of torque. Most manufacturers beef up the bottom end of turbo charged engines b/c with a simple tune you can add 70-100 hp and 50-100 ft/lb of torque.
2. The e=torque is new however and FCA did a great job making it simple.
3. E=torque system was put on there to make one of the smoothest transition of power during start up and take off when using the start stop system. Also to have immediate throttle response to make turbo lag smooth and negligible. It is not the same system on the V6 which still relies on the starter. Magazine article have given great accolades to the simplicity of the design and kudos for being one of the smoothest and fastest start up they've driven. And by the way for the jeepers who want to work on yourself. If you can change an alternator, you can change the MGU.
4. I'm getting 25% better gas mileage than my 15 JKUR and the gas cost is irrelevant to me because I run mid grade top tier gas in all my vehicle.
5. There is no perception you have to run premium fuel except for the few bashing the 2.0 on this forum. The gas cap doesn't say premium fuel only. If premium only fuel was required, the gas cap would let you know.

18Rubicon is offline   Quote
Old 04-14-2019, 10:36 PM   #122
Jeeper
 
Strommen95's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Staten Island
Posts: 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by 18Rubicon View Post
I will repeat myself as well.

There are 26 articles written on the JL from major magazines some doing 0-60 and some doing 1/4mile and not one of them has v6 recording a faster time. You find a video already posted multiple times by a major dufus who does a 0-60 run starting off in a turn effectively shutting down e=torque. That V6 JL also has an intake and catback. I'm not sure he may even have a tune b/c in his in his build prior to that test he was discussing testing different tunes. Even with those article I still wouldn't bet my life the 2.0 is faster b/c no magazine tested back to back same models, mainly b/c its a jeep and they feel it is irrelevant. I agree with those magazines. I will soon before the end of May give you a real life video of a JLUR V6 vs 2.0 JLUR because my brother happens to have the V6.

1. The 2.0 is not a new engine, its been in the Alfa Romeo Guilia which started production on 02/16. The bottom end of the engine is designed to handle 420ft/lb of torque. Most manufacturers beef up the bottom end of turbo charged engines b/c with a simple tune you can add 70-100 hp and 50-100 ft/lb of torque.
2. The e=torque is new however and FCA did a great job making it simple.
3. E=torque system was put on there to make one of the smoothest transition of power during start up and take off when using the start stop system. Also to have immediate throttle response to make turbo lag smooth and negligible. It is not the same system on the V6 which still relies on the starter. Magazine article have given great accolades to the simplicity of the design and kudos for being one of the smoothest and fastest start up they've driven. And by the way for the jeepers who want to work on yourself. If you can change an alternator, you can change the MGU.
4. I'm getting 25% better gas mileage than my 15 JKUR and the gas cost is irrelevant to me because I run mid grade top tier gas in all my vehicle.
5. There is no perception you have to run premium fuel except for the few bashing the 2.0 on this forum. The gas cap doesn't say premium fuel only. If premium only fuel was required, the gas cap would let you know.

The two engines are roughly the same performance wise, which easily suggests the 2.0 is not worth forking up extra money for. Not up front, not for premium fuel, and not for the MGU down the line. Regardless of videos saying the 3.6 is faster, saying the 2.0 is faster, magazine results, etc, my experience with the 2.0 is that is was sluggish. Period. In practical real world driving(not slamming on the gas pedal doing 0-60 or a 1/4 mile) it felt like a true V4. There's absolutely no nonsense about that at all.

You're getting better gas mileage, not better fuel economy. Fuel economy is more important and tells the real truth. Running premium on your 87 octane vehicles was silly. And no, I've never seen anybody say you have to run premium on the 2.0... But you do if you want the advertised fuel mileage and the true benefits of the turbo. Only a fool would knowingly go against what the manufacturer recommends. Why in the world would somebody buy a 2.0 and not run premium on it?

__________________
19' Sport S JLU Mojito!
14' Sport S JKU Anvil sold
Strommen95 is offline   Quote
Old 04-14-2019, 11:03 PM   #123
Jeeper
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 47
I do not run premium, read I run mid grade top tier fuel in all my vehicles. Due to the latest advancement in tuning, DI and ability to base timing off each cylinder the loss is power and efficiency is negligible. Your seat of the pants feel is your prerogative and a just reasoning for your purchase. However, read the article from Motor Trend, Automobile, Road and track, TFL truck reviews and none of them came to your same conclusion. They all thought what you felt would before the test but were pleasantly surprised that it didn't feel that way at all. I do not feel I will ever have to replace an MGU if u understand it's operation, however just letting people know that it is something that is easily replaceable as people suggest what if it breaks. Why in the world would someone buy a 2.0 and not run premium. Surveys say.. b/c u don't have to. I have no quams with the V6, however it does not fit my driving style. I do not like to rev engines to 4-5 grand to accelerate briskly. I can accelerate very quickly in my 2.0 with never breaking 3 grand. I love low end torque and this engine produces it when and where I need it. Avg 22mpg in a JLUR on mid grade gas..plus I hall a$$ and it's a brick driving down the road. I'm impressed. My brother is not avg anything close in his V6 JLUR. BTW, your not paying extra $ for the 2.0. Your paying for a smooth transition free stop start system. It is light yrs ahead of the V6 system and a hell of a lot easier on the powertrain.
18Rubicon is offline   Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 04-14-2019, 11:20 PM   #124
Jeeper
 
FlintRock12's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Location: Desert Rat
Posts: 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strommen95 View Post
Nope, not non sense at all. There’s a decent amount of people who agree with me the 2.0 is sluggish. It’s a 4 cylinder and turbo lag is very real. It’s ironic, you call my post non sense, and follow it up by posting absolutely nothing of value at all.

Here’s a video showing 3.6 is faster with a quick YouTube search. It’s not the only one.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=QzXTpul1mSM

I own a 2.0 JL and owned a 3.6 5 speed JK. There is no comparison. My 2.0 takes off like a rocket. It's as fast as my rally pack awd charger off the line. But, I'll watch videos on YouTube to become more of an expert.
FlintRock12 is offline   Quote
Old 04-15-2019, 12:20 AM   #125
Supporting Member

WF Supporting Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Location: SoCal
Posts: 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strommen95 View Post
Eh, I disagree. The negative reaction is because of the engine costing $1000 more to go with no real added benefits unless you live in higher elevations. Power is roughly the same, fuel economy is the same since you need premium to get the advertised mileage.. It just doesn’t make any sense to pony up extra money for an engine with no added benefits, just more costly maintenance down the line.

The feel of power is not the same, the four feels like it has more torque which it does, and out here in the west we do drive at higher elevations, you do not have to run premium and being honest when the Jeep is already in the mid $50s the extra cost is very small. Finally if one ever wants to get more power out of the motor than stock, it will be much cheaper, easier, more efficient with more potential to do it with the turbo four
slickrock steve likes this.
Landshark99 is offline   Quote
Old 04-15-2019, 06:58 AM   #126
Jeeper
 
Strommen95's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Staten Island
Posts: 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by 18Rubicon View Post
I do not run premium, read I run mid grade top tier fuel in all my vehicles. Due to the latest advancement in tuning, DI and ability to base timing off each cylinder the loss is power and efficiency is negligible. Your seat of the pants feel is your prerogative and a just reasoning for your purchase. However, read the article from Motor Trend, Automobile, Road and track, TFL truck reviews and none of them came to your same conclusion. They all thought what you felt would before the test but were pleasantly surprised that it didn't feel that way at all. I do not feel I will ever have to replace an MGU if u understand it's operation, however just letting people know that it is something that is easily replaceable as people suggest what if it breaks. Why in the world would someone buy a 2.0 and not run premium. Surveys say.. b/c u don't have to. I have no quams with the V6, however it does not fit my driving style. I do not like to rev engines to 4-5 grand to accelerate briskly. I can accelerate very quickly in my 2.0 with never breaking 3 grand. I love low end torque and this engine produces it when and where I need it. Avg 22mpg in a JLUR on mid grade gas..plus I hall a$$ and it's a brick driving down the road. I'm impressed. My brother is not avg anything close in his V6 JLUR. BTW, your not paying extra $ for the 2.0. Your paying for a smooth transition free stop start system. It is light yrs ahead of the V6 system and a hell of a lot easier on the powertrain.
Why would I care what they say about the power? I felt the power myself and it was weak. It's honestly pretty pathetic of you to come on here and imply I'm lying or I'm wrong as if I have an agenda here. The 2.0 was sluggish and weak, period. This was on streets, some tight, some more open then others both times, but I was able to floor it a few times. A more reasonable response would be say to say the dealer put 87 on it and not 91. I have no idea if they ran 91, they probably didn't. This was when I first randomly looked into JLs and didn't do much research yet. A turbo with 87 meant for 91 would not run as efficient. Just because you can doesn't mean it's smart or you should. To suggest you're paying for the ESS is also quite a reach.

I never suggested the MGU is hard to replace. I suggested it's expensive and something a 3.6 owner will never have to worry about regardless if it needs replacing or not. The $1000 upcost, premium, the potential and likely cost of the MGU down the line makes the 2.0 fairly more costly then the 3.6 for neglible benefits if any. I was getting 19 to 19.5 on my JLU Sport S between city and highway. I'm getting 17.5-18 since putting on 33' Duratracs. Fairly better then JK gas mileage.

I also said in my first post they are roughly the same performance wise.. Many results show the 2.0 doing 0-60 3/10ths of a second faster. If that's your definition of "zippy" and blowing away a 3.6, by all means have fun with that logic. It only confirms my point that the 2.0 has no added benefits over the 3.6 except at higher elevations.


Quote:
Originally Posted by FlintRock12 View Post
I own a 2.0 JL and owned a 3.6 5 speed JK. There is no comparison. My 2.0 takes off like a rocket. It's as fast as my rally pack awd charger off the line. But, I'll watch videos on YouTube to become more of an expert.
Good for you. That doesn't change my experience with the engine. I was not biased going in nor wanting it to be bad. It was weak and sluggish when I drove it.
__________________
19' Sport S JLU Mojito!
14' Sport S JKU Anvil sold
Strommen95 is offline   Quote
Old 04-15-2019, 07:44 AM   #127
Jeeper
 
BuckleUp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Location: Cape Cod
Posts: 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strommen95 View Post
I have driven the 2.0 multiple times and it was fairly sluggish up to 40. I didn’t go past that as I wasn’t on a highway. It absolutely felt like a 4 cylinder to me. I actually drove it before ever driving a 3.6 JL, so I was comparing it to my JKU. Without a doubt my JKU with the 5 speed + steel bumpers was quicker. That was my honest experience.

A number of YouTube comparisons show the 3.6 doing 0-60 faster too. Not by much, but a little faster.
I’m guessing it’s the steel bumpers that made it faster. The Dyno and real tests show the opposite.
__________________
God bless our service members
BuckleUp is offline   Quote
Old 04-15-2019, 08:44 AM   #128
Jeeper
 
FlintRock12's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Location: Desert Rat
Posts: 81
LOL

I believe the OP was asking if any 2.0 JL owners regretted buying it.
It turned into another silly "mine is bigger than your's thread".

I don't think I've ever heard anything negative about the 2.0 from actual owners but a lot of negative comments from people that don't actually own and live with one.
FlintRock12 is offline   Quote
Old 04-15-2019, 08:46 AM   #129
Jeeper
 
Leadnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Arizona
Posts: 3,138
I am starting to regret the time I spent reading this thread.
__________________
2014 JKU Willys 6-spd, RK X-Factor 3.5", Fox Resis, KM3 37s, PR60s, Eaton e-lockers, 5.13, Atlas II 3.8, and another $10K in miscellaneous parts.
Leadnut is online now   Quote
Old 04-15-2019, 09:07 AM   #130
Jeeper
 
FlintRock12's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Location: Desert Rat
Posts: 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leadnut View Post
I am starting to regret the time I spent reading this thread.
LOL. Maybe I'll post a video of a JLs doing a quarter mile run to make it all worth it.
Leadnut and 18Rubicon like this.
FlintRock12 is offline   Quote
Old 04-15-2019, 10:10 AM   #131
Supporting Member

WF Supporting Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Location: SoCal
Posts: 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlintRock12 View Post
LOL

I believe the OP was asking if any 2.0 JL owners regretted buying it.
It turned into another silly "mine is bigger than your's thread".

I don't think I've ever heard anything negative about the 2.0 from actual owners but a lot of negative comments from people that don't actually own and live with one.
Could not agree more, who knows maybe three years from now I will either question my choice or be even happier with the 2.0 but at this point zero regrets
Landshark99 is offline   Quote
Old 04-15-2019, 06:15 PM   #132
Jeeper
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 47
Smile

Quote:
Originally Posted by Strommen95 View Post
Why would I care what they say about the power? I felt the power myself and it was weak. It's honestly pretty pathetic of you to come on here and imply I'm lying or I'm wrong as if I have an agenda here. The 2.0 was sluggish and weak, period. This was on streets, some tight, some more open then others both times, but I was able to floor it a few times. A more reasonable response would be say to say the dealer put 87 on it and not 91. I have no idea if they ran 91, they probably didn't. This was when I first randomly looked into JLs and didn't do much research yet. A turbo with 87 meant for 91 would not run as efficient. Just because you can doesn't mean it's smart or you should. To suggest you're paying for the ESS is also quite a reach.

I never suggested the MGU is hard to replace. I suggested it's expensive and something a 3.6 owner will never have to worry about regardless if it needs replacing or not. The $1000 upcost, premium, the potential and likely cost of the MGU down the line makes the 2.0 fairly more costly then the 3.6 for neglible benefits if any. I was getting 19 to 19.5 on my JLU Sport S between city and highway. I'm getting 17.5-18 since putting on 33' Duratracs. Fairly better then JK gas mileage.

I also said in my first post they are roughly the same performance wise.. Many results show the 2.0 doing 0-60 3/10ths of a second faster. If that's your definition of "zippy" and blowing away a 3.6, by all means have fun with that logic. It only confirms my point that the 2.0 has no added benefits over the 3.6 except at higher elevations.




Good for you. That doesn't change my experience with the engine. I was not biased going in nor wanting it to be bad. It was weak and sluggish when I drove it.
Just so you know in the racing world 3/10 of a second 0-60 is two car lengths and most likely 6 cars links by the 1/4 mile. That's called an ass woopin
Gen5Glock21 likes this.
18Rubicon is offline   Quote
Old 04-15-2019, 06:45 PM   #133
Jeeper
 
Strommen95's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Staten Island
Posts: 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by 18Rubicon View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strommen95 View Post
Why would I care what they say about the power? I felt the power myself and it was weak. It's honestly pretty pathetic of you to come on here and imply I'm lying or I'm wrong as if I have an agenda here. The 2.0 was sluggish and weak, period. This was on streets, some tight, some more open then others both times, but I was able to floor it a few times. A more reasonable response would be say to say the dealer put 87 on it and not 91. I have no idea if they ran 91, they probably didn't. This was when I first randomly looked into JLs and didn't do much research yet. A turbo with 87 meant for 91 would not run as efficient. Just because you can doesn't mean it's smart or you should. To suggest you're paying for the ESS is also quite a reach.

I never suggested the MGU is hard to replace. I suggested it's expensive and something a 3.6 owner will never have to worry about regardless if it needs replacing or not. The $1000 upcost, premium, the potential and likely cost of the MGU down the line makes the 2.0 fairly more costly then the 3.6 for neglible benefits if any. I was getting 19 to 19.5 on my JLU Sport S between city and highway. I'm getting 17.5-18 since putting on 33' Duratracs. Fairly better then JK gas mileage.

I also said in my first post they are roughly the same performance wise.. Many results show the 2.0 doing 0-60 3/10ths of a second faster. If that's your definition of "zippy" and blowing away a 3.6, by all means have fun with that logic. It only confirms my point that the 2.0 has no added benefits over the 3.6 except at higher elevations.




Good for you. That doesn't change my experience with the engine. I was not biased going in nor wanting it to be bad. It was weak and sluggish when I drove it.
Just so you know in the racing world 3/10 of a second 0-60 is two car lengths and most likely 6 cars links by the 1/4 mile. That's called an ass woopin
3/10th of a second is relatively nothing, and nobody is racing Wranglers. That’s far from being ‘zippy’ and an ‘ass whooping’. More importantly, V6 was better off the line in my experience. Again, the engines are roughly the same power wise, which suggests the 2.0 is not worth the extra money as OP asked for. Enjoy your purchase.
__________________
19' Sport S JLU Mojito!
14' Sport S JKU Anvil sold
Strommen95 is offline   Quote
Old 04-15-2019, 09:31 PM   #134
Jeeper
 
FlintRock12's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Location: Desert Rat
Posts: 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strommen95 View Post
3/10th of a second is relatively nothing, and nobody is racing Wranglers. That’s far from being ‘zippy’ and an ‘ass whooping’. More importantly, V6 was better off the line in my experience. Again, the engines are roughly the same power wise, which suggests the 2.0 is not worth the extra money as OP asked for. Enjoy your purchase.
Yeah but, but, but........... oh never mind.....................I'm gonna go have a beer.
FlintRock12 is offline   Quote
Old 04-15-2019, 09:34 PM   #135
Jeeper
 
Leadnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Arizona
Posts: 3,138
0-60 in 3.6 sec is zippy. How many car lengths is that over the Wrangler?
__________________
2014 JKU Willys 6-spd, RK X-Factor 3.5", Fox Resis, KM3 37s, PR60s, Eaton e-lockers, 5.13, Atlas II 3.8, and another $10K in miscellaneous parts.
Leadnut is online now   Quote
Old 04-16-2019, 11:42 AM   #136
Jeeper
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Tejas
Posts: 435
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strommen95 View Post
3/10th of a second is relatively nothing, and nobody is racing Wranglers. That’s far from being ‘zippy’ and an ‘ass whooping’. More importantly, V6 was better off the line in my experience. Again, the engines are roughly the same power wise, which suggests the 2.0 is not worth the extra money as OP asked for. Enjoy your purchase.

Jimlanter is offline   Quote
Old 04-16-2019, 12:05 PM   #137
Jeeper
 
Strommen95's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Staten Island
Posts: 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimlanter View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strommen95 View Post
3/10th of a second is relatively nothing, and nobody is racing Wranglers. That’s far from being ‘zippy’ and an ‘ass whooping’. More importantly, V6 was better off the line in my experience. Again, the engines are roughly the same power wise, which suggests the 2.0 is not worth the extra money as OP asked for. Enjoy your purchase.

You know precisely what I meant. Taking things to be too literal is either childish, or plain stupid. I posted a link already of Wranglers racing aswell.

Nobody purchases a Wrangler with racing in mind. With how many Wranglers there are on the road, and how vast the internet is of course there would be videos of them racing.
__________________
19' Sport S JLU Mojito!
14' Sport S JKU Anvil sold
Strommen95 is offline   Quote
Old 04-16-2019, 12:08 PM   #138
Jeeper
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Prescott AZ. Far from the Festering Crap Hole
Posts: 583
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlintRock12 View Post
Yeah but, but, but........... oh never mind.....................I'm gonna go have a beer.
Smart man.
slickrock steve likes this.
Silverback51 is offline   Quote
Old 04-16-2019, 12:13 PM   #139
Jeeper
 
jku007fl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: South Florida
Posts: 484
We need to discuss the difference in lateral acceleration between the JK and JL.
0.87G? 0.85G? ?? I really want to know, it's as important as 0-to 60 times.
slickrock steve likes this.
__________________
_____________________________________

2017 White JKU Rubicon Recon, Manual
JKS JSPEC J Konnect 3.5" Lift
FOX 2.0 Performance Series Shocks Reservoir
Mickey Thompson Baja ATZ 35's
jku007fl is offline   Quote
Old 04-16-2019, 12:19 PM   #140
Jeeper
 
Stitches1974's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Florida
Posts: 2,476
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strommen95 View Post
Nobody purchases a Wrangler with racing in mind.

Cough.

Stitches1974 is online now   Quote
Old 04-16-2019, 01:27 PM   #141
Jeeper
 
Rubecon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Ohio
Posts: 350
Aside from which motor is faster 0-60. Would one have an advantage over the other in a manual transmission? Do both motor options have the silly start/stop thing with the motor at traffic lights?

These are the questions I want to know lol.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Rubecon is offline   Quote
Old 04-16-2019, 02:27 PM   #142
Supporting Member

WF Supporting Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Location: SoCal
Posts: 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rubecon View Post
Aside from which motor is faster 0-60. Would one have an advantage over the other in a manual transmission? Do both motor options have the silly start/stop thing with the motor at traffic lights?

These are the questions I want to know lol.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
if you want a manual it has to be the v6 and yes all of them have the start/stop, which can be turned off with a button, downside is you have to do it every time you restart, the jeep does not remember you want it off. Also the start/stop is disabled in four low
Landshark99 is offline   Quote
Old 04-16-2019, 02:58 PM   #143
Jeeper
 
Rubecon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Ohio
Posts: 350
Quote:
Originally Posted by Landshark99 View Post
if you want a manual it has to be the v6 and yes all of them have the start/stop, which can be turned off with a button, downside is you have to do it every time you restart, the jeep does not remember you want it off. Also the start/stop is disabled in four low


Well that makes an easy decision on which motor for me haha. I drive a 2018 Chevy Traverse for work and the start/stop function with the motor has to be the worst driving experience ever. It is super jerky.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
slickrock steve likes this.
Rubecon is offline   Quote
Old 04-16-2019, 03:15 PM   #144
Jeeper
 
Stitches1974's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Florida
Posts: 2,476
Quote:
Originally Posted by Landshark99 View Post
if you want a manual it has to be the v6 and yes all of them have the start/stop, which can be turned off with a button, downside is you have to do it every time you restart, the jeep does not remember you want it off. Also the start/stop is disabled in four low
Easy fix though.

https://www.smartstopstart.com/
Stitches1974 is online now   Quote
Old 04-16-2019, 06:09 PM   #145
Supporting Member

WF Supporting Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Location: SoCal
Posts: 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rubecon View Post
Well that makes an easy decision on which motor for me haha. I drive a 2018 Chevy Traverse for work and the start/stop function with the motor has to be the worst driving experience ever. It is super jerky.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I don't like it, I thought my BMW did a better job with allowing me to turn it off and stay that way but I must admit Jeep has done a pretty good job with this one, it starts up as soon as I am off the brake pedal
Landshark99 is offline   Quote
Old 04-17-2019, 03:31 PM   #146
Jeeper
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Posts: 21
I chose the 6 cylinder for my 4 door Sahara. It has great torque/acceleration. The new auto trans helps a lot to keep the engine in the proper RPM range. No regrets on my part. You guys can have the turbo model.

Don't get me wrong. We have a turbo Honda CRV too and we love it. But in our view the Honda is more reliable. I simply don't trust the turbo 4 in the Jeep. Maybe in a couple of years....
silver78 is offline   Quote
Old 04-18-2019, 07:39 AM   #147
Jeeper
 
WXman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Central Kentucky, USA
Posts: 2,731
1) You can't compare the 2.0L to a 3.6L JK, because even the 3.6L JL kitten-stomps the JK. New engine, new trans, new axles, deeper standard axle ratios, less weight, etc.

2) Too many people are focused on 0-60 times. It's a Jeep. What you should be concerned about it reliability, longevity, and dependability. And the 3.6L is going to be the hands-down winner. Just wait another year or two for the 2.0s to get some mileage on them and watch all the threads start to pop up like they do with all the other brands tiny turbo motors.

3) My JLU with a 2.5" lift and 35" muds does sub-7 second 0-60 runs, so if power is the only thing you care about then the 3.6L is still fast enough.
aldo90731, Strommen95 and SecondTJ like this.
__________________
Current Jeep: 2020 JT Sport S, Firecracker Red, 8-speed, 3.6L, 0.75" RC level, 35" Patagonia M/T, AO Lonestar wheels, MAX TOW, M.O.R.E. dead pedal, Supernova V.4 bulbs
WXman is offline   Quote
Old 04-18-2019, 07:43 AM   #148
Jeeper
 
WXman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Central Kentucky, USA
Posts: 2,731
Quote:
Originally Posted by smiller1 View Post
I don't really have a dog in this fight and myself would prefer the 3.6, but to all the people who keep saying this I have to ask... have you driven a 2.0? The 3.6 and 2.0 do have about the same peak HP but due to the additional low speed torque and the hybrid boost the 2.0 is way faster off the line and feels much torquier at low speeds. Love it or hate it you've got to give the 2.0 that at least.
Except....the 2.0L has far less off-idle torque than the 3.6L and also has a much more narrow torque band overall...and once the vehicle is moving the eTorque generator disengages and doesn't provide any "helper" torque. And, there's turbo lag. So, almost everyone who test drives both notices that the 3.6L feels better and is more smooth.

But other than that, sure.
Strommen95 and SecondTJ like this.
__________________
Current Jeep: 2020 JT Sport S, Firecracker Red, 8-speed, 3.6L, 0.75" RC level, 35" Patagonia M/T, AO Lonestar wheels, MAX TOW, M.O.R.E. dead pedal, Supernova V.4 bulbs
WXman is offline   Quote
Old 04-18-2019, 12:44 PM   #149
Jeeper
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Plymouth, MA
Posts: 995
While this would be my big concern with the 4-banger, reliability problems are far from being a certainty as you suggest they will be. It may be a 100% solid long life engine, but the one thing we know is that we don't know. But we do know FCA's quality record, hence my trepidation..........

Quote:
Originally Posted by WXman View Post
2) Too many people are focused on 0-60 times. It's a Jeep. What you should be concerned about it reliability, longevity, and dependability. And the 3.6L is going to be the hands-down winner. Just wait another year or two for the 2.0s to get some mileage on them and watch all the threads start to pop up like they do with all the other brands tiny turbo motors.
pcardoza is offline   Quote
Old 04-19-2019, 12:23 AM   #150
Supporting Member

WF Supporting Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Location: SoCal
Posts: 59
This is getting so tiring, nobody here who owns a 2.0 cares that some people who either own the v6 or never drove either version, think the 3.6 is the better choice based on an assortment of myths about turbos. The question was do we regret our choice, guess what nobody here who owns the 2.0 has any regrets at this point. Why don't we ask the same question in two years for both motors.
slickrock steve likes this.

Landshark99 is offline   Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not 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
4.6 liter swap with 2.5 liter HeyImWade TJ General Discussion Forum 2 03-18-2014 10:21 AM
Any regrets on getting true blue? stoop14 JK General Discussion Forum 113 05-09-2013 01:30 AM
any regrets buying a 2012 and up jeep? amarillojeepguy JK General Discussion Forum 44 11-25-2012 01:28 PM
Any regrets ? NickCats JK General Discussion Forum 116 11-11-2011 10:23 PM
any regrets with your color choice tangofoxtrot JK General Discussion Forum 23 01-31-2010 09:27 PM





All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:33 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.1
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging v3.1.0 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

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